People v. Tate
The People v. James Tate
- Proceeding
- appeal
- Trial court
- Superior Court of San Joaquin County
- Trial judge
- C. W. Norton
- Outcome
- other — The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
- Area
- criminal
- Panel
- Hart (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
This cause was on the October, 1911, calendar of this court and submitted on the record.
There is no evidence in the record of an appeal having been taken from the judgment or an order denying the defendant a new trial, if such an order was made. Obviously, therefore, this court has not acquired jurisdiction to review the record.
Moreover, there are no briefs filed in the cause, and, if an appeal had been taken, the same would have to be dismissed for a failure of appellant to file a brief, assuming that he would have omitted to do so had he taken an appeal either from the judgment or the order denying him a new trial, if a motion of that character was made and denied. (People v. Perry, 16 Cal.App. 771, [117 P. 1036].)
For the foregoing reasons, the record will have to be stricken from the files of the court, and it is so ordered.
Chipman, P. J., and Burnett, J., concurred.
Cites, in this corpus
- People v. Perry Crim. No. 153. · 1911-08-08