People v. Langdon
- Area
- criminal
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion
250 Cal.App.2d 595 (1967) THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. HAROLD ALMUS LANGDON, Defendant and Appellant.
Crim. No. 13473. California Court of Appeals. Second Dist., Div. Two.
May 1, 1967. Harold Almus Langdon, in pro. per., for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
THE COURT.
[1] Appellant is attempting to appeal from an order of the superior court denying his motion to vacate the judgment. The record shows that the judgment was affirmed by the Supreme Court of California, People v. Langdon, 52 Cal.2d 425 [341 P.2d 303].
The superior court was without jurisdiction. (Pen. Code, 1265.) The order of the superior court is not appealable, and the record on appeal should not have been prepared.
The appeal is dismissed. *596
Cites, in this corpus
- People v. Langdon Crim. No. 13473 · 1967-05-01
- People v. Langdon Crim. 6391 · 1959-06-26
Cited by
- Gilliam v. Municipal Court Civ. 55933 · 1979-10-16