gno.law

People v. Flores

California Supreme Court · · 1883-12-29 · Published · 64 Cal. 426 · 1 P. 498 · 1883 Cal. LEXIS 664

THE PEOPLE v. A. FLORES

Area
criminal
Panel
McKee (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 — McKee

McKee, J.

Eliminating from the information the word accommodatvm, the description of the offense charged against the defendant was unobjectionable. It may be conceded that the word has no common acceptation; it was, therefore, useless in connection with the charge, and as its insertion in the information did not tend to the prejudice of the defendant, in respect to a substantial right, and did not prejudice the information nor the description of the offense, it should have been disregarded. (§§ 960, 1404, Pen. Code.)

Judgment, reversed, and cause remanded with instructions to overrule the demurrer.

Morrison, C. J., McKinstry, J., and Ross, J., concurred.