gno.law

People v. Elroy

California Court of Appeal · Docket No. 1505. · 1928-10-18 · Published · 271 P. 346 · 94 Cal. App. 355 · 1928 Cal. App. LEXIS 648

The PEOPLE, Respondent, v. MELVIN ELROY, Appellant

Proceeding
appeal from a judgment
Trial court
Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco
Trial judge
K. S. Mahon
Outcome
affirmed — Presiding. Affirmed.
Area
criminal
Panel
Joseph S. Koford (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 — Koford

KOFORD, P. J.

This is an appeal from a judgment of conviction of violating Penal Code, section 288. The sole point upon appeal is that the court erred in permitting a girl nine years and nine months of age to testify against the defendant. Upon examination of this witness by the court she testified that she was nine years old, attended school in the high third grade, that she had testified previously at this trial, that the oath required her to tell the truth and that girls who did not tell the truth would be sent to the reform school. The court thereupon announced his opinion that the witness was qualified and the direct examination proceeded without objection or attempt at cross-examination by the defense as to her qualification.

*356 The point is not well taken. This examination, as well as the witness’ testimony as a whole showed her to be qualified within the meaning of Code of Civil Procedure, section 1880, subdivision 2;

the fact that she had previously testified could also be taken into account; and, finally, the record fails to show any abuse of discretion on the part of the court in permitting her to testify.

(People v. Craig, 111 Cal. 460, 469 [44 Pac. 186];

People v. Baldwin, 117 Cal. 244, 250 [49 Pac. 186];

People v. Delaney, 52 Cal. App. 765 [199 Pac.

896] People v. Reyes, 194 Cal. 650 [229 Pac. 947].)

It is ordered that the judgment be and it is hereby affirmed.

Sturtevant, J., and Nourse, J., concurred.

Cites, in this corpus