59 Cal. 259 | Cal. | 1881
One of the defenses relied on by the defendant was that of alibi. The Court charged the jury: “As to the proof of an alibi, it is a proof admitted by the law; and in fact when it is established it is the most conclusive and logical of all defenses. If it be established to the entire satisfaction of the jury in this case that the defendant here was in Waverly place at the time this alleged robbery was committed, at that very instant, it follows necessarily and emphatically that he could not, at the same instant, have been on California street.”
By this the Court did not say to the jury, as is contended by appellant’s counsel, that the proof in support of the defense of alibi must be made to the entire satisfaction of the
If the charge of the Court was not as specific as it might have been, the defendant might have asked for an instruction more specific and definite on that point, which he did not do.
Judgment and order affirmed.
McKinstry, J., and McKee, J., concurred.