People v. Vierra
THE PEOPLE v. JUAN VIERRA
- Area
- criminal
- Panel
- Joseph B. Crockett (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 indictment is not sufficient to sustain a conviction for the offense attempted to be charged. An averment that the defendant was armed with a deadly weapon and made an assault, is no statement of the fact that the assault was with the weapon. He may have been thus armed and yet have committed a simple assault, or an assault with some other instrument not deadly in its character. The indictment should have stated directly and certainly that the assault was with the weapon; that is, that the weapon was used by the defendant as an instrumentality of the assault. (Penal Code, secs. 245 and 952; People v. Venard, 6 Cal. 562; People v. Jacobs, 29 Cal. 579; People v. Cougleton? 44 Cal. 93.)
*452Jo Hamilton, Attorney-General, for the People.
By the Court :
The indictment, at the most, charged a simple battery,, and its allegations will not support a judgment, as for a felonious assault. ' Judgment reversed, and cause remanded. Remittitur forthwith.
Dissent — Crockett
Crockett, J., dissenting:
I dissent, on the ground that, in my opinion, the indictment sufficiently charges an assault with a deadly weapon.
Cites, in this corpus
- People v. Jacobs · 1866-07-01
- People v. Vanard · 1856-07-01