gno.law

People v. Lux

California Court of Appeal · Crim. No. 531. · 1914-11-10 · Published · 145 P. 153 · 25 Cal. App. 726 · 1914 Cal. App. LEXIS 193

The People v. Hazel Lux

Proceeding
appeal from a judgment
Trial court
Superior Court of Alameda County
Trial judge
F. B. Ogden
Outcome
other — The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
Area
criminal
Panel
The Court. &#8212 (author)

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

It is conceded that the evidence upon the whole case is sufficient to support the verdict; and the only point made is the alleged error in the cross-examination of the defendant. The direct examination of the defendant upon one particular point related to her possession, prior to her going to a moving picture show, of a pistol — the pistol with which it was alleged she committed the crime of murder charged against her. The direct examination unequivocally referred to this pistol and the defendant's possession of it. The court is satisfied that the cross-examination on that point was germane to the direct examination. The people were entitled to know what she did with the pistol prior to the shooting, and where she carried it on her person. There is no doubt at all in our minds but that the cross-examination on that subject was legitimate and proper and without any prejudice to the defendant; and that being the only point in the case, the judgment and order appealed from are affirmed. *Page 727