Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

dence, and not to be disturbed.-Doolittle v. Pa- I applied by the directors of the selling corpora-
cific Coast Safe & Vault Works, 154 P. 753. tion.-Id.
(E) Torts.

Where a corporation buys all the property of

another for full value and without fraud, notice
Om 491 (Wyo.) Corporations are liable for ultra to the purchasing corporation that the selling
vires torts.-Stockgrowers' Bank of Wheatland corporation is insolvent is not notice of the
v. Gray, 154 P. 593.

directors' intent to misapply the purchase mon-

ey.-Id.
(F) Civil Actions,
499 (Wash.) Payment of corporation license

XI. DISSOLUTION AND FORFEITURE
fee required by Rem. & Bal. Code, $ 3715, after

OF FRANCHISE.
trial and before argument for new trial or en-m 617 (Wash.) An assignment of its indem-
try of findings and decree, is sufficient compli- nity policy by an insolvent coal company the
ance with the statute to authorize suit by cor- name of which had been stricken by the sec-
poration especially where defendant took judg- retary of state from the public rolls for fail-
ment on his counterclaim in the action.-North- ure to pay its annual licenses to the widow of
west Motor Co. v. Braund, 154 P. 1098.

a deceased employé, who had recovered judg-
Om 508 (Wash.) Where defendant corporation, ment against the company for the death, was
after being served through its president and not void, but voidable, and could not be com-
notified of the amendment of the complaint cor- plained of by the insurer.-Davies v. Maryland
recting a misnomer of defendant, elected to Casualty Co., 154 P. 1116.
stand upon its amended answer in general de-
nial, there was a sufficient appearance to give

XII. FOREIGN CORPORATIONS.
the court jurisdiction.-Freeborn v. Chewelah mw 642 (Okl.) A foreign corporation engaged in
Copper King Mining Co., 154 P. 1095.

interstate commerce within the state with a

resident thereof is not subject to Sess. Laws
VIII. INSOLVENCY AND RECEIVERS. 1909, c. 10, art. 1, fixing the duties of foreign
Ow542 (Cal.) A conveyance of the property of corporations.-- Hollister v. National Cash Reg-

ister Co., 154 P. 1157.
a corporation whereby the grantee company as-
sumed the debts of the grantor is based on a cm 653 (Idaho) Under Rev. Codes, $ 2792,
valuable consideration, and is not fraudulent where plaintiff, an officer and trustee of a for
within Civ. Code, & '3442.-Manning v. App eign corporation, was chargeable with knowl-
Consol. Gold Mining Co., 154 P. 301.

edge that the corporation, apparent maker of
Where one corporation conveyed all of its the notes sued on, had not complied with the
property to a foreign corporation so that threat state laws, and that the corporation's acts in
ened litigation might be conducted in the fed- purchasing corporate stock from him were in
eral courts, instead of the courts of the resi- violation of law, he could not recover.-Dietrich
dence of the grantor corporation, such fact does v. Copeland Lumber Co., 154 P. 626.
not show that the conveyance was fraudulent.
--Id.

CORPUS DELICTI.
545 (Okl.) A director of an insolvent corpo- See Homicide, em228.
ration cannot prefer an antecedent unsecured
debt due to himself, where such preference will

CORROBORATION.
deprive other creditors of the entire amount due
them; the directors being trustees for the bene- See Criminal Law, Om510, 511.
fit of creditors.--Union Coal Co. v. Wooley, 154
P. 62.

COSTS.
Where a corporation sells all its property, the
money paid is held by the directors in trust for See Garnishment, 225.
payment of creditors; the residue if any, to be
paid to the stockholders.--Id.

1. NATURE, GROUNDS, AND EXTENT

OF RIGHT IN GENERAL.
547 (Okl.) Where directors of an insolvent
corporation sold all of its property and paid Cm2.(Idaho) Rev. Codes, $ 4912, relative to
debts alleged to be due themselves, but paid taxation of costs for the prevailing party, refers
nothing to plaintiff, equity had jurisdiction of only to costs and disbursements incurred in the
an action to charge such directors as trustees. action in Idaho courts, and not to costs occa-
--Union Coal Co. v. Wooley, 154 P. 62.

sioned by proceedings in the United States Land
Where directors of an insolvent corporation Office in support of an adverse claim under
have paid a debt due themselves in preference Rev. $t. $ 2326 (U. S. Comp. St. 1913, 8 4623).
to debts due other creditors, and mingled with -Golden Marguerite Silver & Copper Mining
their own funds the money received, a personal Co. v. National Copper Mining Co., 154 P. 207.
judgment may be rendered against them in fa-low 13 (Or.) In an equitable proceeding the al-
vor of a creditor who has received nothing.-Id. lowance of costs and disbursements rests in the

A party haring a pending action for tort discretion of the court.--City of Portland v.
against a corporation is a "creditor" within American Surety Co. of New York, 154 P. 121.
Rev. Laws 1910, § 2893, defining "creditor,"22 (Cal. App.) Under Code Civ. Proc. $$
where he afterwards obtains judgment.--Id.

1022, 1025, to carry costs a judgment of the
em 548 (Cal.) In a suit by a judgment creditor superior court must amount to $300, so that
of a corporation to set aside a conveyance of judgment for nominal damages will not do so.-
its property to another corporation, which as- Lund v. Lachman, 154 P. 295.
sumed the debts, evidence held insufficient to m47 (Cal. App.) In ejectment by the vendor
show that the conveyance was fraudulent.- of realty against the assignee of the buyer and
Manning v. App Consol. Gold Mining Co., 154 others upon default in payment, where the com-
P. 301.

plaint stated no cause of action against a de-
X. CONSOLIDATION.

fendant which had and claimed no interest in
ww590 (Okl.) Where one corporation buys all the property, judgment for costs against such
the property of another, for full value and with defendant was improper.-Sweet v. Richvale
out fraud, the purchasing corporation acquires Land Co., 154 P. 608.
title free from claims of creditors of the selling
corporation.-Union Coal Co. v. Wooley, 154

III. PERSONS, PROPERTY, AND
P. 62.

FUNDS LIABLE.
Where a corporation for full value and with ww98 (Cal.) In stockholder's action, court's
out fraud buys all the property of another, it discretionary power as to costs, held not to au-
need not see that the purchase money is properly thorize award against intervening stockholder
of costs accruing before his intervention.-Whit- III. PROPERTY,' CONTRACTS, AND ten v. Dabney, 154 P. 312.

LIABILITIES.

(B) Contracts. V. AMOUNT, RATE, AND ITEMS. Om 146 (Idaho) Only costs necessarily incur- ing with plaintiff to prepare plans and superin,

124 (Okl.) Where a county, after contractred arechargeable against the losing party, tend construction of a courthouse, abandoned unless the statute otherwise clearly provides the project for legal reasons, and thereafter, on Golden Marguerite Silver & Copper Mining bonds being voted, employed other architects, Co. v. National Copper Mining Co., 154 P. 207. held, that the county was not liable to plaintiff

for damages sustained.-Weathers v. Board of VII. ON APPEAL OR ERROR, AND Com'rs of Coal County, 154 P. 642. ON NEW TRIAL OR MOTION THEREFOR.

COUNTY BOARDS. Om230 (Or.) Where one several subcontrac- See Counties, m43, 51. tors joined for purpose of determining their rights to participation in suit by materialman

COURTHOUSES. against contractor was denied participation and obtained reversal on appeal, he was a prevailing See Counties, Omw124. party, and the others were not entitled to costs against him.-City of Portland v. American

COURTS. Surety Co. of New York, 154 P. 121. ww240. (Or.) Where one of several subcontrac-See Amicus Curiæ; Appeal and Error; Con

stitutional Law, 56, 328; Contempt; tors joined for purpose of determining their rights to participation in suit by materialman

Counties, ww124 ; Infants, 19; Judgment, against contractor was denied participation and

Omw 642; Jury, 11; Justices of the

Peace; obtained reversal on appeal, the others were not

Prohibition; Removal of Causes; entitled to costs against the contractor's surety.

Trial, 370–404. -City of Portland v. American Surety Co. of

II. ESTABLISHMENT, ORGANIZANew York, 154 P. 121,

TION, AND PROCEDURE IN 246/2 (Utah) While affirmance of a judg

GENERAL, ment usually carries cost, costs will not be awarded, where appellant 'filed an affidavit of (A) Creation and Constitution, and Court

Oficers. impecuniosity.-Cody v. Cody, 154 P. 952.

42 (Okl.) Sess. Laws 1909, c. 14, art. 7,

under which the superior court of Pottawatomie CO-TENANCY.

county was organized, held constitutional. See Tenancy in Common.

Parker v. Hamilton, 154 P. 65.

(D) Rules of Decision, Adjudications, COUNTERCLAIM.

Opinions, and Records. See Set-Off and Counterclaim.

89 (Cal.) Decisions on the interpretation of written instruments have limited value when

applied to the construction of documents em. COUNTERFEITING.

bodying different language.-In re Whitney's See Forgery.

Estate, 154 P. 855.
COUNTIES.

On 92 (Okl.) The expression of a view on a

point not necessary to the decision is "obiter See Affidavits, cm 5; Evidence, m387; Man- dictum.”-Lausten v. Lausten, 154 P. 1182. damus, m77.

93 (Wash.) Where a former case announced

a rule affecting the rights of parties to contracts II. GOVERNMENT AND OFFICERS. of conditional sale under which property rights (A) Organization and Powers of Govern- have become vested, the doctrine of stare decisis ment in General.

requires it to be followed, except as otherwise em 24 (Cal.) In absence of constitutional re Music House y. Ritner, 164 P. 787.

determined by a subsequent statute.-Eilers strictions, Legislature has full control of property held by counties as state's agencies with me 97 (Wash.) Where a case presents the same power to dispose thereof without consent of federal question already decided in another case or compensation to the counties.--Reclamation by United States Supreme Court, its adjudicaDist. No. 1500 v. Superior Court in and for tion thereon is controlling.- Northern Pac. Ry. Sutter County, 154 P. 845.

Co. v. Tuttle, 154 P. 796.

Om 107 (Utah) In suit to quiet title to the use (C) County Board.

of water, where plaintiff claimed that he had m43 (Wash.). Under Rem. & Bal. Code, s developed the water, and defendants claimed 8988, and in view of Laws 1913, p. 461, § '13, that it was part of a natural stream, the opinthe Governor had power to appoint" commission ion of a justice of the Supreme Court concur. ers to fill two of the vacancies caused by the re- helå to have necessarily concurred also in the

ring in the reversal of judgment for plaintiff call of all three of the commissioners of a county; Const. art. 11, $ 6, authorizing the county Lake Mining Co. v. Midway Irr. Co., 154 P.

affirmative judgment for defendants.- Mountain commissioners to fill vacancies, not applying.-

584. State v. Dimmick, 154 P. 163.

51 (Idaho) Under Rev. Codes, 88 1908, III. COURTS OF GENERAL ORIG1909, held that it is the duty of the county com

INAL JURISDICTION. missioners, at their first regular meeting in January next after their election, to elect a chair. (A) Grounds of Jurisdiction in General. man to hold until expiration of his term, unless 121 (Cal. App.) The superior court, in an ache sooner ceases to be a commissioner.-Prich- tion to enforce the liability of corporate stockard v. McBride, 154 P. 624.

holders for its breach of contract, had no juris.

diction as to defendants against each of whom (D) Officers and Agents.

damages for less than $300 were prayed.-JohnOm63 (Cal.App.) Under Const. art. 11, 8 742, son v. Hinkel, 154 P. 487. par. 5, as amended in October 1911, Pol. Code, iv. COURTS OF LIMITED OR INFEŠS 894, 910, and 4024, held, that assistant proba

RIOR JURISDICTION. tion officer in a county had not been regularly appointed, and hence could not collect salary as a 190 (l'tah) Where a judgment of the city such officer.-Anderson v. Lewis, 154 P. 287. court, not having been superseded, was satisfied

5;

on execution pending appeal to the district / pied land to which he has no title, there is an
court, the party successful below could not have immediate constructive eviction, entitling the
further judgment on his claim.--Moon v. Boll- grantee to the same remedies as though he had
winkel, 154 P. 939.

been deprived of actual possession by legal pro-

cess.-Jones v. Gallagher, 154 P. 552.
V. COURTS OF PROBATE JURISDIC-
TION.

COVERTURE.
en 200 (Okl.) Under Rev. Laws 1910, 88 1798 See Husband and Wife.
1806, the superior court has jurisdiction of mat
ters of probate in a cause appealed from the

CREDITORS.
county court to the district court and transfer-
red on motion of plaintiffs to the superior See Assignments for Benefit of Creditors ;
court.-Parker v. Hamilton, 154 P. 65.

Bankruptcy; Compositions with Creditors;

Fraudulent Conveyances; Subrogation.
em 201 (Wash.) It is within the power of the
probate court to determine all matters neces-

CREDITORS' SUIT.
sary to the due administration of an estate, so
that it may authorize the administratrix to con- See Corporations, m548.
vey property held in trust for the benefit of oth-
ers.-Ritchie v. Trumbull, 154 P. 816.

CRIMINAL LAW.
VI. COURTS OF APPELLATE JURIS- See Assault and Battery; Bail; Burglary;
DICTION.

Conspiracy, ww41 ; Contempt; Convicts,
(A) Grounds of Jurisdiction in General.

Embezzlement; False Pretenses; For:

gery; Homicide ; Indictment and Informa-
206 (Okl.) The only questions determinable

tion; Intoxicating Liquors, m 131-238; Lar-
by the Supreme Court under Act March 11,

ceny; Libel and Slander, 141-160; Ma-
1915 (Laws 1915, c. 107, art. 2, subd. A) $ 1,

licious Prosecution ; Mandamus, On 61;
are those instituted to determine the validity of

Rape; Receiving Stolen Goods; Seduction,
such act, and not those arising in the adminis-

m32-46; Weapons, cm17; Witnesses,
tration of it or relating to the application or
distribution of revenues collected.-in re Gross

300, 359.
Production Tax of Wolverine Oil Co., 154 P.

I. NATURE AND ELEMENTS OF
362.

CRIME AND DEFENSES
207 (Kan.) The Supreme Court has no orig-

IN GENERAL.
inal jurisdiction in injunction and no power to
issue an injunctive order, except to protect its own 24 (Okl.Cr. App.) The presumption that ev-
own jurisdiction and the rights of parties, until ery, sane man intends the natural consequence
it has determined some controversy pending be- of his act is not conclusive or alone sufficient to
fore it.-State v. Flannelly, 154 P. 235.

convict, but must be supplemented by other evi-

dence to avoid a reasonable doubt.-Jones v.
VIII. CONCURRENT AND CONFLICT- State, 154 P. 689.
ING JURISDICTION, AND
COMITY.

X. EVIDENCE.
(A) Courts of Same State, and Transfer of (C) Other Offenses, and Character of Ac.
Causes.

ensed.
em488 (Okl.) Irregularities in the transfer of 369 (Mont.) In a prosecution for statutory
a case from the district to the superior court rape, proof of similar acts by defendant and
may be waived, and, when waived, any judg- the prosecuting witness is always admissible to
ment rendered by the superior court is regular. corroborate the latter's testimony.-State
-Parker v. Hamilton, 154 P. 65.

Harris, 154 P. 198.
(B) State Courts and United States Courts.

(D) Materiality and Competency in Gen-
Om489 (Kan.) State courts have jurisdiction cm395 (Or.) In a criminal prosecution for en-
of actions by shippers of interstate freight for gaging in the loan business without a license,
repairing cars to put them in condition for use, certain papers and correspondence seized by the
where the maximum charge for such repairs is officers in defendant's rooms were admissible.
fixed by the tariff on file with the Interstate State v. Ware, 154 P. 905.
Commerce Commission.-Rock Milling & Eleva-
tor Co. v. Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co., 154 P. (E) Best and Secondary and Demonstra-
254.

tive Evidence.
COVENANTS.

en 403 (Okl.Cr. App.) A photographic copy of a

deed, the signature to which was alleged to
See Husband and Wife, On 81; Landlord and have been forged by defendant, held admissible
Tenant, Cm130; Logs and Logging, Om3.

on preliminary proof showing that it was in de-

fendant's possession.-Grayson v. State, 154 P.
II. CONSTRUCTION AND OPERA- 334.

TION.
(D) Covenants Running

(F) Admissions, Declarations, and Hear-
with the Land.

say.
57 (Utah) A covenant of warranty by one m 406 (Cal. App.) Accused's denial of the
having neither possession of nor title to the charge against him, not being a confession, is
land conveyed does not run with the land.-H. admissible without showing that it was volun-
T. & C. Co. v. Whitehouse, 154 P. 950.

tarily made.-People v. Dye, 154 P. 875.
III. PERFORMANCE OR BREACH.

414 (Nev.) In a prosecution for burglary, it

was not necessary that a foundation be laid for
Om 100 (Okl.) Where a grantor purchases a the admission of defendant's statements that
paramount title after eviction of the grantee, he he purchased the stolen jewelry in certain cities.
cannot compel the grantee to accept such after- -State v. Blaha, 154 P. 78.
acquired title în satisfaction of the covenant of 419, 420 (Wyo.) Where witnesses have died
warranty or in mitigation of damages for the

or have left the jurisdiction, evidence of their
breach thereof.-Jones v. Gallagher, 154 P. 552. testimony given at a former trial between the
Om 102 (Okl.) Where a grantor assumes to con- same parties cannot be excluded on the ground
vey, with full covenants of warranty, unoccu-l of hearsay.-Ivey v. State, 154 P. 589.

V.

eral.

and

Exclu-

eral.

fendants.

to

G) Acts and Declarations of Conspirators | weighs the evidence on the other, not necessar-
and Codefendants.

ily in number of witnesses or quantity, but
Cm 423 (Okl.Cr.App.) Where, in a prosecution in its effect.—People v. Miller, 154 P. 468.
for forgery it appeared that certain persons bad 561 (Cal.) A “reasonable doubt" is not a
conspired to forge a decd to defraud, held that

mere possible doubt, but is the absence of an
evidence of anything said and done by any of abiding conviction to a moral certainty of the
the conspirators in furtherance of the purpose truth of the charge. -People v. Miller, 154 P.
of the conspiracy was admissible against a co-468.
conspirator.-Grayson v. State, 154 P. 334.

XII. TRIAL.
(H) Documentary Evidence
sion of Parol Evidence Thereby.

(B) Course and Conduct of Trial in Gen-
Om 430 (Okl.Cr.App.) Under Rev. Laws 1910,
$$ 1170, 5099, 5115, held that a duly certified

em 636 (Okl.Cr.App.) That the judge, in the ab-
copy of the recorded deed, alleged to have been the jury were deliberating and cautioned them

sence of defendant and his counsel, went where
forged by accused, was admissible in evidence.- against separating or communicating with out-
Grayson v. State, 154 P. 334.

siders and cautioned the bailiff against permit-
(J) Testimony of Accomplices and Code- ting them to separate, held not to require a re-

versal.-Carter v. State, 154 P. 337.
Omw 507 (Cal.) Where a boy 16 years of age ac-
companied accused and made no protest to ac-

(C) Reception of Evidence.
cused committing the crime against nature, mak- en 662 (Wyo.) The production of witnesses in
ing no complaint until questioned by others, the the examining trial where accused was allowed
boy was an accomplice, and his testimony must to cross-examine held sufficient confrontation to
be corroborated before conviction can be had.- warrant the introduction of their evidence on
People v. Robbins, 154 P. 317.

trial for the offense.--Ivey v. State, 154 P. 589.
Ono 508 (Nev.) A previously convicted jointem 678 (Mont.) In a prosecution for statutory
principal is a competent witness for the state rape, where the evidence tended to show several
on murder trial under Rev. Laws, $ 5419, de- offenses, the action of the court, though earlier
fining witnesses, which section is applied to requested, in failing to require the state to elect
criminal actions by section 7451.-State v. until the close of its case, was not erroneous.-
Tranmer, 154 P. 80.

State v. Harris, 154 P. 198.
Om510 (Okl.Cr. App.) Under Rev. Laws 1910, Under Rev. Codes, & 9147, where the evidence
8 5884, where two or more accomplices testify, in a prosecution for statutory rape tends to
the same corroboration is required as if there show several offenses, the jury must be inform-
were but one.-Cudjoe v. State, 154 P. 500. ed, either before defendant enters upon his de
m510 (Okl.Cr.App.) A conviction on the un- fense, or in the formal instructions, that evi-
corroborated testimony of an accomplice cannot dence of other acts than the one the state relies
be sustained.-Clark v. State, 154 P. 1005.

on can only be considered as corroboration of
511 (Cal.) Under Pen. Code, $ 1111, as

prosecutrix.-Id.
amended by St. 1911, p. 484, declaring a con-
viction cannot be had on the testimony of an ac-

(D) Objections to Evidence, Motions
complice unless corroborated, it is necessary

Strike Out, and Exceptions.
that the evidence of corroboration shall tend to m695 (Wash.) In a prosecution for receiving
connect defendant with the crime, and it is in- stolen goods, a challenge to the sufficiency of
sufficient if it merely casts suspicion on accused. the evidence, consisting only of a motion to
-People v. Kobbins, 154 P. 317.

withdraw the case from the jury and to instruct
In a prosecution for the crime against nature, the jury to return a verdict of not guilty on the
evidence of corroboration of accused's accom- evidence presented by the state, was insufficient
plice, held insufficient to warrant conviction. to raise the question of defendant's connection
-Id.

with the crime charged.-State v. Ketterman,
Pen. Code, $ 1111, as amended in 1911 (St. 154 P. 182.
1911, p. 484), 'requiring corroboration of an ac-
complice before conviction can be had on his (E) Arguments and Conduct of Counsel.
testimony, will not allow conviction where the 706 (Nev.) Where a previously convicted
only testimony in corroboration of the accom: joint principal was a witness in a murder trial,
plice was as to statements concerning acts not
essential to the offense.-Id.

a question to him by district attorney, whether
Proof of mere suspicious circumstances and of held misconduct.-State v. Tranmer, 154 P. 80.

he was in penitentiary under death sentence,
an opportunity to commit the crime will not
warrant conviction on the testimony of the ac- 2730 (Wash.) Argument by the prosecutor
complice.--Id.

that accused was a party to and induced a wit-

ness to leave the state held not so palpably
(K) Confessions.

prejudicial that the error could not be cured
Om518 (Cal.App.) Where accused was informed by a prompt direction for the jury to disregard
that he need not make a statement, any state | it.-State v. Cavelero, 154 P. 435.
ment that he made concerning the charge against
him is admissible without any other showing (F) Province of Court and Jury in Gen.
that it was voluntarily made or was not the re-
sult of promises.- People v. Dye, 154 P. 875. w742 (Okl.Cr.App.) Where the acts of the
Om519 (Cal.App.) A confession of murder, witness are admitted, the question whether he
which is shown, and properly determined by the was an accomplice is for the court.-Cudjoe k.
court, to have been made voluntarily by defend- State, 154 P. 500.
ant to sheriff, is admissible.-People v. Andrade, Where the evidence is conflicting on whether
154 P. 283.

a witness participated in the crime, the question
C519 (Wash.) The confession of one charged whether he was an accomplice is for the jury.
with grand larceny, voluntarily made to a po- -Id.
lice officer while under arrest and in jail, though m763, 764 (Cal. App.) Without positive evi-
she was not reminded that she was under arrest, dence connecting defendant with a homicide
that she was not obliged to reply, and that her charged, except an alleged confession and his
answers would be used against her, was ad- failure to testify for himself, an instruction
missible.-State v. Brownlow, 154 P. 1099. that defendant does not deny the killing, but

justifies it in self-defense, usurps the functions
(M) Weight and Sufficiency.

of a jury, and violates Const. art. 6, § 19, which
Om560 (Cal.). “Preponderance of the evidence” provides that judges shall not charge juries on
means only that the evidence on one side out-1 matters of fact.-People v. Andrade, 154 P. 283.

eral.

(K) Verdict.

(G) Necessity, Requisites, and Sufficiency , ceased had retreated, without a request there-
of

for.-State v. Hawkins, 154 P. 827.
om 778 (Cal. App.) Without positive evidence n829 (Cal.App.) The refusal of requests coy-
connecting defendant with homicide charged, ex-ered by the charges given is not error.-People
*cept an alleged confession and his failure to

v. Rivera, 154 P. 29.
testify for himself, an instruction that defend- e829 (Idaho) Refusal of an instruction cov-
ant does not deny the killing, but justifies it in ered by one given and as favorable as the one
self-defense, throws upon him the burden of refused held 'not error.-State v. Jones, 154 P.
mitigation, justification, or excuse, contrary to 378.
Pen. Code, s 1105, wbich imposes this burden,

Instructions given on the law of self-defense
except when the proof of the prosecution tends as applied to the facts of the case held suffi-
to show that the crime amounts only to man- cient, so that the refusal of instructions request-
slaughter or was justifiable or excusable.--Peo- ed on that subject was not error.-Id.
ple v. Andrade, 154 P. 283.
Omo782 (Idaho) Rev. Codes, $ 7886, does not re- (J) Custody, Conduct, and Deliberations
quire that the court, in instructing the jury,

of Jury.
draw inferences from the facts in proof, or point om 865 (Okl.Cr.App.) In view of Rev. Laws
out what inferences might be drawn.-State v. 1910, 88 5913, 5926, held that the court properly
Jones, 154 P. 378.

refused to discharge the jury and directed them
Ow783 (Mont.) In a prosecution for statutory to again retire, where they had announced that
rape, where the evidence tended to show several they had agreed on defendant's guilt, but were
acts, charges held to have instructed the jury unable to agree as to the degree and punish-
sufficiently on the point that evidence as to ment.-Rushing v. State, 154 P. 1005.
acts other than that which the state elected to
rely on should be considered only as corroborat-
ing prosecutrix.-State v. Harris, 154 P. 198. 875 (Nev.) A verdict will not be held void
Cm783 (Wash.) In a prosecution for grand lar- for uncertainty if its meaning can be determin-
ceny, a charge mentioning that there was evi-ed by reference to the record.-Ex parte Booth,
dence introduced showing previous conviction, 154 P. 933.
but that it was no proof of defendant's guilt, m884 (Mont.) A verdict of guilty fixing pun-
but only touched her credibility, was proper - ishment at not less nor more than two years'
State v. Brownlow, 154 P. 1099.

confinement in the penitentiary, was valid as a
Cm786 (Nev.) In view of Rev. Laws, $ 7160, as conviction of the offense charged, although not
amended by St. 1915, c. 157, held, that the court in compliance with Laws 1915, c. 14, providing
properly refused to instruct that defendant had for indeterminate sentences.-Ex parte Lewis,
testified in hi own behalf, that this was his 154 P. 713.
legal right, and that the jury could not reject m893 (Mont.) Conviction of one tried for
his testimony merely because he was the ac- crime is accomplished by the verdict, and not
cused.-State v. Blaha, 154 P. 78.

upon entry of the judgment.-Ex parte Lewis,
786 (Okl.Cr.App.) Giving of an instruction 154 P. 713.
singling out accused and instructing on his XIII. MOTIONS FOR NEW TRIAL AND
credibility as a witness, held error.-Doud v.

IN ARREST.
State, 154 P. 1008.
Om789 (Cal.) Instruction in prosecution for Cm941. (Wash.) Where the questions of men.
murder held erroneous for requiring defendant tality of the prosecuting witness and his credibil-
to establish defense of insanity beyond a rea- ity were fully gone into, and the showing on
sonable doubt.--People v. Miller, 154 P. 468.

such questions on a motion for new trial does
Code Civ. Proc. $8 1826, 1835, defining cer-

not go beyond the showing made on the trial,
tain degrees of evidence, have no application to it is not error to refuse a new trial.-State v.
the question of the correctness of an instruction Brooks, 154 P. 795.
which places upon the defendant the necessity Cm 957 (Cal.App.) As a conviction cannot be
of establishing his defense by a preponderance set aside on the affidavit of jurors themselves,
of the evidence, since those sections relate only affidavits that some of the jurors believed ac-
to the character of evidence sufficient to sus cused was entitled to an acquittal, and that
tain a verdict.--Id.

none understood that in convicting accused they
811 (Idaho) It is error to give an argumen-

were convicting him of a felony, do not warrant
tative instruction directing attention to certain

new trial.- People v. Sidwell, 154 P. 290.
portions of the evidence and suggesting infer.
ences to be drawn therefrom, thereby singling

XIV. JUDGMENT, SENTENCE, AND
out certain facts favorable to defendant and

FINAL COMMITMENT.
ignoring others.-State v. Jones, 154 P. 378.

995 (Ney.) A judgment must follow and be
814 (Kan.) In the absence of evidence that supported by the verdict, and, if the verdict is
the parties are husband and wife, the court need not such as is determinative of the issues made
not instruct that defendant cannot be convicted by plea of not guilty, it is a void verdict, and
of rape if the woman is his wife.-State v. Van the court has no jurisdiction to enter judgment
Sickle, 154 P. 1015.

thereon.-Ex parte Booth, 154 P. 933.
(H) Requests for Instructions.

XV. APPEAL AND ERROR, AND
Om 824 (Cal.App.) In a prosecution for crimi.

CERTIORARI.
nal libel, where the defendant requested no spe (B) Presentation and Reservation in Low-
cific instruction as to his contention of privilege er Court of Grounds of Review.
under Pen. Code, 8 256, the failure to instructen 1028 (Wash.) The question of defendant's
thereon was not reversible error.-People v. connection with the offense charged cannot be
Turner, 154 P. 34.

raised on anneal, not having been presented to
Om 824 (Nev.) Failure to instruct on the max- or decided by the trial court.-State v. Ketter-
im, “Falsus in unom, falsus in omnibus," was man, 154 P. 182.
not error, where accused made no request form 1036 (Cal. App.) Error cannot be predicat-
such instructions.-State v. Blaha, 154 P. 78. ed on the admission of evidence not objected to
.824 (Wash.) Where an instruction as to below.-People v. Rivera, 154 P. 29.
killing after adversary had withdrawn from con- m 1036 (Wyo.) Where accused made no objec-
flict stated law generally applicable, defendant tion to an affidavit of the prosecutor showing the
could not complain of failure to present theory death or absence of witnesses who testified at
that darkness prevented him from knowing de- i his examining trial, but merely objected to evi-

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »