People v. Buck
The PEOPLE, Respondent, v. H. BUCK, Appellant
- Proceeding
- appeal from a judgment
- Trial court
- Superior Court of Sacramento County
- Trial judge
- Charles O. Busick
- Outcome
- affirmed — Affirmed.
- Area
- criminal
- Panel
- Franklin D. McDaniel (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 — McDaniel
McDANIEL, J., pro tem.
The defendant was convicted of the crime of incest. The appeal to this court is from the judgment of conviction following a verdict of guilty, as charged in the information, and the order denying defendant’s motion for new trial.
The appeal has been submitted upon the record in the case. No brief has been filed on behalf of the defendant, and there has been no specification of errors made in the trial of the case:
As is said in the case of People v. Perry, 16 Cal. App. 771 [117 Pac. 1036]:
*323 “ This court is not required, in the absence of special assignments, in some form, of alleged error, to search the record for the purpose of determining whether or not the trial in the court below was in all respects conducted without prejudice to the substantial rights of the accused.
“We have, however, taken the pains carefully to read the stenographer’s transcription of the testimony, and we have upon such investigation discovered no reason for questioning its sufficiency to justify and support the verdict.”
The judgment and order are, accordingly, affirmed.
Plummer, J., and Finch, P. J., concurred.
Cites, in this corpus
- People v. Perry Crim. No. 153. · 1911-08-08
Cited by
- People v. Gidney Crim. 4131 · 1937-11-22