Criminal Law · MBE-tested
PEOPLE, Respondent, v. THOMAS M. LONG, Appellant
1 Cal. Unrep. 710·Supreme Court of California·1872·CA
We concur: Wallace, J.; Niles, J.
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
PEOPLE, Respondent, v. THOMAS M. LONG, Appellant.
No. 3154;
January 11, 1872.
Criminal Law. — Where Proof of the Corpus Delicti has been had only through the confession of the defendant, a conviction is error.
APPEAL from County Court, Plumas County.
Attorney General and D. S. Ham for respondent; E. S. Hogan for appellant.
See People v. Long, 43 Cal. 444.
[MAJORITY — RHODES, J.]
RHODES, J.
— It being admitted on the argument that there was no evidence to prove the corpus delicti in the case other than the evidence of the confessions of the defendant, and that alone not being sufficient to justify a conviction (People v. Jones, 31 Cal. 565), it is ordered that the judgment be reversed and cause remanded for a new trial.
We concur: Wallace, J.; Niles, J.