123 Cal. 373 | Cal. | 1899
Defendant prosecutes this appeal from a judgment and order denying his motion for a new trial, he having been convicted of the crime of grand larceny in stealing a horse.
Errors are insisted upon in the overruling by the court of objections to certain questions asked the defendant upon cross-examination by the district attorney, when the defendant was testifying in his own behalf. These questions were asked for the purpose of laying a foundation in order that the defendant might be impeached by showing that he had made inconsistent statements at other times. It has been held often that when a party attempts to impeach a witness in this way the witness is entitled to have the time, place, and parties present, specified with particularity in order that he may answer with a recollection refreshed as to the conditions surrounding him'at the time it is
For the foregoing reasons the judgment and order are affirmed.