People v. Hartman
1881 Cal. LEXIS 564
Cal.
1881
Check Treatment
The Court :

The appellant was indicted for the crime of grand larceny, and on the trial the District Attorney was permitted, against the objection of defendant, to introduce evidence tending to show that the defendant had at another time stolen other property than that described in the indictment. This was error. (Walker v. Commonwealth, 1 Leigh, 574; State v. Daubert, 42 Mo. 242; State v. Goetz, 34 Mo. 85.)

Judgment and order reversed.