People v. Sing

California Court of Appeal

People v. Sing

84 P. 242, 2 Cal. App. 731, 1906 Cal. App. LEXIS 238

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedJanuary 24, 1906

DocketCrim. No. 6.

StatusPublished

This text of 84 P. 242 (People v. Sing) 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. Sing, 84 P. 242, 2 Cal. App. 731, 1906 Cal. App. LEXIS 238 (Cal. Ct. App. 1906).

Pincite

Opinion

CHIPMAN, P. J.

Information for rape upon a female child under the age of sixteen. Defendant was convicted and sentenced to twenty years’ imprisonment at San Quentin. The transcript was filed February 25, 1905, and the cause has been placed upon three different calendars of this, court. Defendant has made no appearance, and has filed no brief. The attorney general, at the calling of the case for the January calendar, asked that the cause be submitted on the transcript and that the judgment be affirmed. We have given the evidence a careful examination and are satisfied that there was sufficient to justify the jury in finding the defendant guilty as charged. We do not feel called upon to examine the record for errors of law. In a case involving capital punishment the supreme court has felt itself under some duty to examine the record, in the absence of aid by counsel by brief, or in case of failure of counsel to appear. In cases of lesser felonies, however, we understand the practice is otherwise. (People v. Clark, 121 Cal. 633, [54 Pac. 147].) In the case of People v. Busby, 113 Cal. 181, [45 Pac. 191], the judgment was affirmed in a murder case where the penalty was life imprisonment, for want of appearance or brief in behalf of defendant, without an examination of the record.

The judgment is affirmed.

Buckles, J., and McLaughlin, J., concurred.

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

CHIPMAN, P. J.

Information for rape upon a female child under the age of sixteen. Defendant was convicted and sentenced to twenty years’ imprisonment at San Quentin. The transcript was filed February 25, 1905, and the cause has been placed upon three different calendars of this, court. Defendant has made no appearance, and has filed no brief. The attorney general, at the calling of the case for the January calendar, asked that the cause be submitted on the transcript and that the judgment be affirmed. We have given the evidence a careful examination and are satisfied that there was sufficient to justify the jury in finding the defendant guilty as charged. We do not feel called upon to examine the record for errors of law. In a case involving capital punishment the supreme court has felt itself under some duty to examine the record, in the absence of aid by counsel by brief, or in case of failure of counsel to appear. In cases of lesser felonies, however, we understand the practice is otherwise. (People v. Clark, 121 Cal. 633, [54 Pac. 147].) In the case of People v. Busby, 113 Cal. 181, [45 Pac. 191], the judgment was affirmed in a murder case where the penalty was life imprisonment, for want of appearance or brief in behalf of defendant, without an examination of the record.

The judgment is affirmed.

Buckles, J., and McLaughlin, J., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

84 P. 242, 2 Cal. App. 731, 1906 Cal. App. LEXIS 238, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-sing-calctapp-1906.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack