People v. Lawrence
THE PEOPLE v. JACK LAWRENCE
- Area
- criminal
- Panel
- Foote (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 — Foote
Foote, C.
The defendant was tried and convicted in the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco, upon an indictment charging him with the commission of a misdemeanor, viz., gaming, under section 330 of the Penal Code. From the judgment and an order denying a new trial he has appealed.
The only point made for the reversal of the judgment and order is, that the court which tried him was without jurisdiction so to do.
Under the authority of the case of Greene v. Superior Court, 78 Cal. 556, it is apparent that the point is well taken. We therefore advise that the judgment and order he reversed.
Belcher, C. C., and Hayne, C., concurred.
The Court.
— For the reasons given in the foregoing opinion, the judgment and order are reversed.
Cites, in this corpus
- Green v. Superior Court No. 20514 · 1889-04-16
Cited by
- In Re McKinney Crim. 12698 · 1968-12-20
- People v. Palermo Land and Water Co. Crim. No. 280. · 1907-01-31