86 Cal. 403 | Cal. | 1890
Conviction of arson, motion for new trial denied, and defendant appeals. Only two points are made in the brief of appellant.
1. That it was error to admit certain evidence of other burnings of property on the rancho of Chapman, the place where the fire in this instance occurred. The evidence against the defendant in this case was almost entirely circumstantial. Among other circumstances
2. One of the instructions given by the court to the jury was an exact copy of the instruction considered by this court in Bank, in the. case of People v. Levine, 85 Cal. 39. We again repeat that the defense of alibi is “not one requiring that the evidence given in support of it should be scrutinized otherwise or differently from that given in support of any other issue
8. At the oral argument, an additional point was made, — that the evidence was insufficient to justify the verdict. We have carefully read all the evidence in the record, and find no cause for disturbing the verdict upon this ground.
Judgment and order affirmed.
Paterson, J., concurred.
Works, J. — I think the instruction complained of, relating to the defense of alibi, was erroneous, but as the court in Bank held in People v. Levine that such an instruction was not cause for reversal, I feel myself bound by that decision.