People v. Rico

California Court of Appeal

People v. Rico

238 P. 814, 73 Cal. App. 213, 1925 Cal. App. LEXIS 281

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedJune 12, 1925

DocketDocket No. 857.

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 238 P. 814 (People v. Rico) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Rico, 238 P. 814, 73 Cal. App. 213, 1925 Cal. App. LEXIS 281 (Cal. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

PLUMMER, J.

The defendant was convicted of maintaining a nuisance and from the judgment following conviction appeals to this court. The information upon which the defendant was tried is identical in form and substance with the information in the case of People v. Salvatore Buonocore, ante, p. 208 [238 Pac. 812], save and except the location of the building or house in which the intoxicating liquors were found. To this information the defendant filed a demurrer in form and substance the same as that considered in the case just referred to, and for the reasons therein stated we hold that the demurrer should have been sustained. The instructions given in this case are identical

*214 with,the instructions considered and held erroneous in the case of People v. Mehra, ante, p. 162 [238 Pac. 802], and People v. Fuller, ante, p. 183 [238 Pac. 809], and for the same reasons it must be held that the instructions were erroneous. This action was also prosecuted upon the fact that the defendant was found in possession of a small flask of intoxicating liquor, and for the reasons stated in the opinion filed in the case of People v. Mehra, supra, it must be held that such fact does not constitute the offense of maintaining a nuisance. Where a defendant is convicted of an offense with which he is not charged, no erroneous rulings can be held as cured, or nonprejudicial, under the provisions of section 4% of article VI of the state constitution.

Upon the authority of the cases just referred to in the opinions, deciding the cases to which we have referred, it is ordered that the judgment of the trial court be, and the same is hereby reversed, and the cause remanded, with directions to the trial court to sustain the defendant’s demurrer to the information filed in this case.

Thompson, J., pro tern., and Finch, P. J., concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PLUMMER, J.

The defendant was convicted of maintaining a nuisance and from the judgment following conviction appeals to this court. The information upon which the defendant was tried is identical in form and substance with the information in the case of People v. Salvatore Buonocore, ante, p. 208 [238 Pac. 812], save and except the location of the building or house in which the intoxicating liquors were found. To this information the defendant filed a demurrer in form and substance the same as that considered in the case just referred to, and for the reasons therein stated we hold that the demurrer should have been sustained. The instructions given in this case are identical

*214 with,the instructions considered and held erroneous in the case of People v. Mehra, ante, p. 162 [238 Pac. 802], and People v. Fuller, ante, p. 183 [238 Pac. 809], and for the same reasons it must be held that the instructions were erroneous. This action was also prosecuted upon the fact that the defendant was found in possession of a small flask of intoxicating liquor, and for the reasons stated in the opinion filed in the case of People v. Mehra, supra, it must be held that such fact does not constitute the offense of maintaining a nuisance. Where a defendant is convicted of an offense with which he is not charged, no erroneous rulings can be held as cured, or nonprejudicial, under the provisions of section 4% of article VI of the state constitution.

Upon the authority of the cases just referred to in the opinions, deciding the cases to which we have referred, it is ordered that the judgment of the trial court be, and the same is hereby reversed, and the cause remanded, with directions to the trial court to sustain the defendant’s demurrer to the information filed in this case.

Thompson, J., pro tern., and Finch, P. J., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

238 P. 814, 73 Cal. App. 213, 1925 Cal. App. LEXIS 281, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-rico-calctapp-1925.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack