Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Judges

PEOPLE v. CHIN AH HONG

61 Cal. 376 PEOPLE v. CHIN AH HONG No. 10,767 Supreme Court of California September 7, 1882

         Appeal from a judgment of conviction, and from an order denying a new trial, in the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. Freelon, J.

         JUDGES: McKinstry, J. Morrison, C. J., and Ross, Sharpstein, Myrick, McKee, and Thornton, JJ., concurred.

         OPINION

          McKINSTRY, Judge

         In Bank. The defendant attempted to establish an alibi; he himself and his principal witness swearing that he was not at the scene of the assault.

         The affidavit of McFadden, used on the motion for a new trial, if it be considered as averring that defendant was not present when the prosecuting witness was beaten, is merely cumulative evidence. But the affidavit does not distinctly state that defendant took no part in the assault. McFadden says: " Two Chinamen came behind Lee Wing (prosecutor), one pulled him back, and the other struck him." Further: " Affiant is positive Chin Ah Hong is not the man who struck Lee Wing."

         If both took part in the assault, it is immaterial whether defendant " pulled him back" or struck him.

         Judgment and order affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

People v. Hong
(Sep 7, 1882)