People v. Wooster

California Supreme Court
People v. Wooster, 16 Cal. 435 (Cal. 1860)
Baldwin

People v. Wooster

Opinion of the Court

Baldwin, J. delivered the opinion of the Court

Field, C. J. and Cope, J. concurring.

Upon sustaining the demurrer to the indictment in this case, the District Attorney took no exception; but moved for and obtained an order submitting the case to another grand jury. The People now appeal from this order sustaining the demurrer. We think, under the circumstances, the appeal should be dismissed. A contrary practice would lead to oppression and confusion. The failure to except and taking the order must be considered an acquiescence in the judgment and a waiver of a right of appeal. If the grand jury had found a new bill on the resubmission, no appeal would lie, of course, from any disposition of the demurrer to the first bill; and the resubmission of the matter is not less decisive of the intent to abandon the first indictment, and to hold as final the judgment on the demurrer.

Appeal dismissed.

Reference

Full Case Name
THE PEOPLE v. WOOSTER
Cited By
3 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
Demurrer to an indictment for perjury being sustained, the District Attorney took no exception, but moved for and obtained an order submitting the case to another grand jury. Subsequently, The People appeal from the order sustaining the demurrer: Held, that the failure to except and talcing this order was an acquiescence in the judgment on demurrer, and a waiver of any right to appeal.