Cross-examination of accused, see Witnesses, 81 an offense which may be prosecuted in justice's 277. See Adulteration; Breach of the Peace; Contempt; Homicide: Nuisance, § 91; Prostitution; Rape, § 16; Receiving Stolen Goods. Assault with intent to commit rape, see Rape, § 16. Bastardy, see Bastards, §§ 35-92. Larceny, see Larceny. Negligence or misconduct in office, see Officers, Practicing medicine or surgery without author- Violations of liquor laws, see Intoxicating Liq- Violations of municipal regulations, see Munic- I. NATURE AND ELEMENTS OF Issuance of town order without authority as § 20. In the criminal law "willful" involves evil intent or legal malice.-State v. McAloon (Wis.) 1067. III. PARTIES TO OFFENSES. Asportation of stolen goods by carrier, see Larceny, § 17. IV. JURISDICTION. $90. The constitutional jurisdiction to hear all criminal matters conferred on the circuit courts may be exercised over an offense which may also be prosecuted in justice's court.Wieden v. State (Wis.) 509. VII. FORMER JEOPARDY. § 198. On a prosecution for practicing medicine without filing the certificate required by Code, § 2580, evidence of defendant's acts prior to a former indictment held inadmissible.-State v. Yates (Iowa) 174. VIII. PRELIMINARY COMPLAINT, AF- Variance between indictment or information court, and may bind him over to the circuit § 230. Proceedings on accused's preliminary examination from the time the state's witnesses testified until they signed the written transcript of the testimony held continuous, so that the justice did not lose jurisdiction for not entering a formal adjournment when the witnesses testified, or because accused was bound over for trial before the testimony was signed.-Oblaser v. Mandell (Mich.) 590. § 244. A magistrate's return to the prosecuting attorney of the preliminary examination in a criminal case is inadequate where it does not contain the signed testimony taken therein.— Oblaser v. Mandell (Mich.) 590. § 244. If a magistrate's return to the prosecuting attorney of the preliminary examination of accused is invalid and incomplete, he could amend it before it was filed, or make a new one. Oblaser v. Mandell (Mich.) 590. IX. ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEAS, AND Validity of laws providing for trial without ar- § 262. The constitutional right of arraignment and plea held waived by accused in all cases except capital cases by silence.-Hack v. State (Wis.) 492. § 273. An information charging murder in the first degree by name also charges murder in the second degree, so that a plea, “guilty as charged," is indefinite as to the degree.-State v. Noah (N. D.) 1121. § 273. Under Rev. Codes 1905, § 8807, providing that the person pleading guilty of murder shall designate whether he pleads guilty of murder in the first or second degree, a plea of "guilty as charged in the information" held insufficient.-State v. Noah (N. D.) 1121. X. EVIDENCE. Competency of witnesses in general, see Witnesses, § 138-195. and Credibility, impeachment, contradiction, corroboration of witnesses, see Witnesses, §§ 344-383. Cross-examination of witnesses, see Witnesses, §§ 267-277. Examination of witnesses, see Witnesses, $$ In particular criminal prosecutions. Bastardy proceedings, see Bastards, § 59. For practicing medicine without authority, see (A) Judicial Notice, Presumptions, and § 309. In a prosecution for furnishing liquor to another under circumstances warranting proof of other offenses, held, that it was reversible error to admit certain testimony as proof of another offense, as it did not connect accused therewith.-People v. Giddings (Mich.) 546. § 327. The burden of establishing guilt is at every stage of the trial on the state, and the law never presumes guilt, and never casts on ae § 207. An examining magistrate may hold a preliminary examination of one charged with cused the burden of satisfying the jury of his ence or assented to.-Burnett v. State (Neb.) innocence.-State v. Kimes (Iowa) 164. 927. (B) Facts in Issue and Relevant to Issues, and Res Gestæ. 354. The record of proceedings subsequent to the crime and before indictment wherein defendant was found insane held properly excluded.-State v. Neubauer (Iowa) 312, 316. (H) Documentary Evidence and Exclusion of Parol Evidence Thereby. Admissibility as affected by identity of name, see Names, § 14. (I) Opinion Evidence. § 354. Certain evidence held properly stricken out as not tending to show defendant's mental condition either at the time of the crime or at the time of trial.-State v. Neubauer (Iowa)-State v. Hogan (Iowa) 178. 312, 316. § 452. It was within the discretion of the court to refuse certain opinion evidence as to the mental capacity of the prosecuting witness. (C) Other Offenses, and Character of Accused. $369. Proof of other offenses is never admissible as substantive evidence of the act charged.-People v. Giddings (Mich.) 546. § 371. In a prosecution for furnishing intoxicating liquor to a certain person, held that, to show the knowledge and intent of accused, and to rebut the presumption of accident or mistake, testimony as to furnishing liquor to others was admissible.-People v. Giddings (Mich.) 546. § 372. After the state had elected to rely on one of two transactions, held proper to allow the jury to consider testimony of other and prior acts of defendant of the same general character.-State v. Neubauer (Iowa) 312, 316. (D) Materiality and Competency in Gen $465. The opinion of a witness as to defendant's mental condition, without any facts on which it is based, is inadmissible.-State v. Neubauer (Iowa) 312, 316. (J) Testimony of Accomplices and Codefendants. Corroboration of testimony of female in prosecution for rape, see Rape, § 54. 507. The thief is not an accomplice of the person who receives the stolen property.-State v. Feinberg (Iowa) 208. § 508. Testimony of defendant's paramour held admissible.-State v. Brown (Iowa) 899. § 5102. Defendant's presence in an alley held not competent evidence to connect him with the commission of an adultery at a subsequent date at another place.-State v. Brown (Iowa) 899. eral. § 393. On trial of banker for receiving deposits when insolvent, schedules filed by him in involuntary bankruptcy proceedings held inadmissible to prove insolvency.-State v. Drew (Minn.) 1091. (E) Best and Secondary and Demonstra tive Evidence. § 401. Where the corporate character is a mere collateral matter not essential to the main question tried, it may be established by parol evidence, or by proof that it is acting and doing business as such.-State v. Rozeboom (Iowa) 783. (F) Admissions, Declarations, and Hear say. Dying declarations, see Homicide, § 203. § 406. Evidence of a conversation between accused and the sheriff as to another case held inadmissible as an admission.-People v. Williams (Mich.) 555. $409. Held error not to permit a witness for defendant to give her version of a conversation, wherein it was claimed by the state that defendant had admitted his guilt.-State v. West (S. D.) 751. § 417. A shipping bill on which was written a memorandum by the station agent without defendant's knowledge held inadmissible in a prosecution for larceny of butter after being loaded on a car for shipment.-State v. Rozeboom (Iowa) 783. 8 417. A signed statement by prosecutrix held inadmissible in a prosecution for statutory rape except as impeaching evidence.-People v. Nichols (Mich.) 25. (G) Acts and Declarations of Conspirators and Codefendants. § 422. Evidence concerning the conduct of another, who committed the same offense upon the prosecuting witness shortly before the act of defendant, held admissible.-State v. Hogan (Iowa) 178. § 424. Confessions held not admissible against an alleged accomplice, unless made in his pres $ 510. Proof of a recent intimacy, to be legitimate corroborating evidence of adultery, must be shown by testimony other than that of defendant's paramour.-State V. Brown (Iowa) 899. of adultery on the paramour's testimony, the 8511. To justify a conviction on a charge corroboration must be neither uncertain nor unequivocal.-State v. Brown (Iowa) 899. 511. The corroboration of the testimony of defendant's paramour held insufficient to justify a conviction on a charge of adultery.-State v. Brown (Iowa) 899. (K) Confessions. § 516. Confessions and admissions distinguished.-Burnett v. State (Neb.) 927. § 516. It is error to instruct the jury to regard mere inculpatory statements of accused as confessions.-Burnett v. State (Neb.) 927. § 519. Where there was no suggestion in the evidence that any influence was exercised by the officers to induce defendant to make a statemissible, though he had no attorney present ment to them, evidence of his confession is adwhen his confession was made.-State v. Neubauer (Iowa) 312, 316. $ 520. Certain statement by sheriff held not such an inducement as to render confession incompetent.-State v. Allison (S. D.) 747. § 531. Where circumstances are such as to create a doubt as to competency of a confession, held incumbent on state to show same, whether objection is made or not.-State v. Allison (S. D.) 747. (M) Weight and Sufficiency. Credibility, impeachment, corroboration, and contradiction of witnesses, see Witnesses, §§ 344-383. In particular criminal prosecutions. XI. TIME OF TRIAL AND CONTIN- $ 576. Relator was arrested on a warrant charging him with perjury before the grand jury then in session. Held, that he had no right to insist that the charge against him be submitted to the grand jury in session at the time of his arrest.-State v. Riley (Minn.) 11, 13. XII. TRIAL. In particular criminal prosecutions. Bastardy proceedings, see Bastards. § 71. 719. The prosecuting attorney should confine his argument to the facts proved.-People v. Williams (Mich.) 555. § 723. It is prejudicial error for the attor ney in a prosecution for rape to urge a convietion in view of the fact that the jury had before them the victims of defendant.-State v. Nyhus (N. D.) 71. § 730. Where the state's attorney attempts to prove second offense, and fails to do so, and the jury is cautioned to disregard such an attempt, there was no error.-State v. O'Neal (N. D.) 68. $730. Improper argument of counsel held not rendered harmless by cautioning the jury to disregard misstatements of prosecuting attorney. -State v. Nyhus (N. D.) 71. (B) Course and Conduct of Trial in Gen- (F) Province of Court and Jury in General. § 635. Exclusion of public generally from courtroom held not to deprive accused of a speedy and public trial.-State v. Nyhus (N. D.) 71. § 639. Pol. Code 1903, § 934, as amended by Sess. Laws 1905, c. 90, held to authorize the court to appoint an attorney to assist the state's attorney in a trial where in its opinion, justice requires.-State v. Johnson (S. D.) 847. § 656. Objection that the court failed to caution a witness not to answer questions until opportunity had been had to object held not sustained by the record.-State v. Lindquist (Minn.) 215. (C) Reception of Evidence. eral. In particular criminal prosecutions. See Homicide, § 276; Larceny, § 68; Rape, $ 57. § 736. Where the evidence is conflicting, leaving in the court's mind any question as to the competency of a confession, the question should be submitted to the jury.-State v. Allison (S. D.) 747. $737. In a prosecution for larceny from a railroad company, oral evidence of the corporate character of the prosecutor held sufficient to take the issue of incorporation to the jury.State v. Rozeboom (Iowa) 783. 8741. In a prosecution for receiving stolen goods, the weight of evidence of the thief, who disposed of the goods to accused, testifying for berg (Iowa) 208. Examination of witnesses, see Witnesses, 88 the prosecution, is for the jury.-State v. Fein 230-277. § 667. Remarks of the judge in striking out question held not ground for objection.-State v. Lindquist (Minn.) 215. $670. Testimony of the officer as to defendant's talk, demeanor, and condition while under arrest held properly excluded.-State v. Neubauer (Iowa) 312, 316. $670. Certain testimony as to defendant's actions held properly excluded, in the absence of a statement that, if admitted, it would tend to show insanity.-State v. Neubauer (Iowa) 312, 316. § 670. If proof is admissible for any purpose, it is not rendered incompetent because it tends to show other offenses by accused.-People v. Giddings (Mich.) 546. § 671. Excusing the jury, while receiving testimony to show the competency of a confession, held proper practice.-State v. Allison (S. D.) 747. § 678. Introduction of evidence, in a prosecution for statutory rape, of evidence of intercourse prior to the time charged, held not to constitute an election as to the act for which accused was being prosecuted.-People v. Nichols (Mich.) 25. $678. Statement of prosecuting attorney held not to be an election as to date of offense for which accused was being prosecuted.-People v. Nichols (Mich.) 25. (D) Objections to Evidence, Motions to (E) Arguments and Conduct of Counsel. 8719. Remarks of prosecuting attorney held fatal error.-People v. Nichols (Mich.) 25. In particular criminal prosecutions. 772. A proper instruction, in a prosecution for statutory rape, as to date of committing of fense, stated.-People v. Nichols (Mich.) 25. 8 781. Where the court admits proof of a confession alleged by defendant to be involuntary, the jury should be directed to disregard it if they find it was not voluntarily made.-Heddendorf v. State (Neb.) 150. § 789. A charge on reasonable doubt held erroneous.-State v. Kimes (Iowa) 164; Burnett v. State (Neb.) 927. § 789. A charge made on the jury, being brought into court after some hours had been spent in consultation, held not misleading in view of the instructions.-Hack v. State (Wis.) 492. (H) Requests for Instructions. § 824. Under Code Cr. Proc. § 385, held not error to fail to charge, in the absence of request, that circumstantial exidence must be so strong as to exclude every other possible theory than that of guilt.-State v. Colvin (S. D.) 749. § 824. Court held not required to instruct as to witnesses being accomplices and the corroboration necessary in the absence of request. -State v. Ham (S. D.) 955. 8829. In a prosecution for practicing medi-quested, the Supreme Court may, in its discrecine without a license, the refusal to give an in- tion, consider the point as raised.-Bradley v. struction held not error.-State v. Miller (Iowa) State (Wis.) 1024. 167. § 829. In a prosecution for homicide the court's failure to expressly charge that the burden was on the state to show, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the shooting was not in self-defense was not error.-State v. Clayton (Iowa) 605. § 829. A request to charge is rightfully refused, where covered by the court's own charge, though in different language. State v. Allison (S. D.) 747. (J) Custody, Conduct, and Deliberations of Jury. § 858. It was not error, on a trial for keep ing an unlicensed drinking place, to charge the jury that they might take to their room certain exhibits, consisting of bottles and jugs in which there was whisky.-State v. Lindquist (Minn.) 215. XIII. MOTIONS FOR NEW TRIAL AND IN ARREST. 938. Grant or refusal of new trial for new ly discovered evidence held largely within trial court's discretion.-State v. Colvin (S. D.) 749. XIV. JUDGMENT, SENTENCE, AND FINAL COMMITMENT. $995. Judgment, in so far as it related to imprisonment for costs, held void for indefiniteness.-State v. Johnson (S. D.) 847. XV. APPEAL AND ERROR, AND Remedy by appeal or writ of error as affecting right to habeas corpus, see Habeas Corpus, § 4. (A) Form of Remedy, Jurisdiction, and Right of Review. $ 1010. The certification of a prosecution for violation of a city ordinance by the municipal court of Duluth to the district court, and by that court to the Supreme Court, confers no jurisdiction on either the district or Supreme Court.-City of Duluth v. Orr (Minn.) 4. § 1010. Rev. Laws 1905, § 5409, does not authorize certification from a district court of questions in criminal prosecutions begun in municipal courts before justices of the peace.-City of Duluth v. Orr (Minn.) 4. (B) Presentation and Reservation in Lower Court of Grounds of Review. § 1035. Where defendant made no objection to any juror and used no peremptory challenges. he cannot object on appeal that some of the jurors stated that they had formed opinions.State v. Hogan (Iowa) 178. § 1035. Error cannot be predicated on the absence of the trial judge during a part of the argument, where his place was taken by another judge, and defendant's counsel had consented to his absence.-State v. Hogan (Iowa) 178. $ 1036. An objection by defendant that he was deprived of some substantial right on account of the admission of testimony afterwards ruled out to be reviewed on appeal should have been made before the cause was finally submitted to the jury.-State v. Miller (Iowa) 167. § 1037. If a prosecutor's prejudicial language is not objected to or called to the court's attention at the time, an assignment of error thereon cannot be considered.-People v. Giddings (Mich.) 546. $ 1038. Though accused cannot predicate error on the refusal of an instruction orally re 1056. Instructions given will not be reviewed in the absence of exceptions taken, unless exceptions are filed as prescribed by Code, § 3709.-State v. Burns (Iowa) 600. (G) Review. § 1144. The record being silent whether the court admonished the jury, upon separation, as required by Code Cr. Proc. § 380, it will be presumed that the court performed its duty.State v. Johnson (S. D.) 847. § 1152. The trial court's authority, under Pol. Code 1903, § 934, as amended by Sess. Laws 1905, c. 90, to appoint counsel to assist the state's attorney is wholly discretionary, and cannot constitute reversible error.-State v. Johnson (S. D.) 847. § 1156. The trial court's discretion in the grant or refusal of a new trial for newly discovered evidence will not be interfered with except upon clear showing of error.-State v. Colvin (S. D.) 749. § 1156. Held. that denial of new trial for newly discovered evidence would not be disturbed by Supreme Court.-State v. Colvin (S. D.) 749. § 1158. Finding by court on conflicting evidence held binding on the Supreme Court.State v. Allison (S. D.) 747. § 1159. The Supreme Court held authorized to grant a new trial on the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence to sustain a conviction.-State v. Sells (Iowa) 776. § 1159. A verdict on conflicting evidence approved by the trial judge held conclusive on appeal.-Sedlack v. State (Wis.) 510. § 1159. A verdict of guilty cannot be disturbed, there being any credible evidence which in any reasonable view supports it.-Van Haltren v. State (Wis.) 1039. § 1162. What constitutes prejudicial error stated.-State v. Pirkey (S. D.) 713. § 11662. Error, if any, in overruling challenges for bias to two jurors cannot be held prejudicial where accused did not exercise any of his three peremptory challenges.-State v. Johnson (S. D.) 847. § 1167. The irregularity, if any, in overruling a plea in abatement for want of a preliminary examination held not prejudicial.-Hack v. State (Wis.) 492. § 1169. The admission of improper evidence is harmless, where the facts thereby shown Rozeboom (Iowa) 783. were fully shown by proper evidence.--State v. § 1170. The court's refusal to permit defendant to testify to a certain fact held cured by subsequent testimony thereto without objection. -State v. Dyer (Iowa) 629. § 1170. Error in excluding certain evidence upon criminal trial held harmless.-State v. West (S. D.) 751. § 1171. Argument of prosecuting attorney outside of facts and remark of court held prejudicial.-State v. Pirkey (S. D.) 713. $1171. Prejudicial statements by prosecuting attorney in his argument and by court held not to be disregarded as technical error merely because evidence supports conviction.-State v. Pirkey (S. D.) 713. (H) Determination and Disposition Cause. of $ 1182. The trial judge must maintain the standard best calculated to secure protection to the jury from outside influence; and, where prejudicial error resulting from outside influ ence cannot be shown affirmatively, nor by nec- $ 11. A husband and wife having executed essary inference nor presumed, there is no rem- joint blank deeds to divide their real estate, the edy, though such error may possibly exist.-husband after the wife's death held estopped to Sedlack v. State (Wis.) 510. claim dower in certain property intended to be partitioned to the wife and by her conveyed to a trustee.-Manatt v. Griffith (Iowa) 753. § 1183. Whether an excessive sentence has been imposed is not a matter for the consideration of the Supreme Court, but for the board of parole.-State v. Rozeboom (Iowa) 783. $1186. Under St. 1898, § 2829, and Laws 1909, p. 205, c. 192, the Supreme Court will disregard mere formal errors and technical errors affecting any substantial right.-Hack v. State (Wis.) 492. § 1186. Under St. 1898, § 2829, and independent thereof, a remark of the clerk of the court to the jury and the reply of a juror held not prejudicial misconduct.-Sedlack v. State (Wis.) 510. XVII. PUNISHMENT AND PREVEN- Fines in general, see Fines. § 1211. Comp. Laws, §§ 2108, 11,785, held not to authorize a sentence to state's prison of one convicted of lewdness, under section 11,693. -Ex parte Bolden (Mich.) 548. CRIMINATION. Compelling accused to criminate himself, see Criminal Law, § 393. CROPS. Accrual of cause of action for injuries to crops, see Limitation of Actions, § 55. Parol evidence of reservation of crops on conveyance of land, see Evidence, § 441. § 6. Growing crops pass by deed, but may be severed by reservation, either by parol agreement or instrument in writing.-Cooper v. Kennedy (Neb.) 1131. CROSS-EXAMINATION. Of witnesses in general, see Witnesses, §§ 267277, 372. CROSSINGS. Railroad crossings, see Railroads, 88 102, 413. Railroad crossings, accidents at, see Railroads, $$ 327-352. Street railroad crossings, right of way over tracks, see Street Railroads, § 85. CROSS-MARKS. § 11. A trustee's agreement to carry out a trust without compensation, and his obligation to do so, held a sufficient consideration for a deed to him, so as to enable him to claim that the husband of his grantor was estopped to claim dower.-Manatt v. Griffith (Iowa) 753. CUSTODY. Of children, see Infants, § 14. Of children, determination on habeas corpus, see Habeas Corpus, § 99. Of children on divorce of parents, see Divorce, Of goods in course of transportation, see Car§§ 303, 312. riers, § 76. CUSTOMS AND USAGES. Custom as to furnishing appliances to serv Evidence as to customary method of doing work ants, see Master and Servant, § 105. by servant, see Master and Servant, § 274. Parol evidence to explain trade terms in contracts, see Evidence, § 457. § 14. Where a contract, clear and explicit, granted a party the right to sell pianos, but was silent as to the subject of exchange, it cannot be enlarged by proof of a custom on the part of piano dealers to exchange pianos.-Starr Piano Co. v. Morrison (Mich.) 562. CUTTING TIMBER. See Logs and Logging, §§ 3, 4. DAMAGES. Compensation for property taken for public use, see Eminent Domain, §§ 79-136. Release of claim for damages, see Release. Right to trial by jury in action for injunction and incidental damages, see Jury, § 13. Damages for particular injuries. See Death, §§ 87-101; Fraud, § 59; Libel and Breach of contract of sale, see Sales, §§ 384, Slander, § 119; Nuisance, § 50. 418; Vendor and Purchaser, § 351. Breach of indemnifying bond, see Indemnity, $ 9. Delay in transportation or delivery of live stock, see Carriers, § 229. Injuries from negligent or wrongful use of street, see Municipal Corporations. § 706. Alteration of instrument, see Alteration of In- Taking or detention of personal property, see struments, § 29. Trover and Conversion, § 44. Trespass, see Trespass, § 47. Recovery in particular actions or proceedings. See Trespass, § 47; Trover and Conversion, § 44. For infringement of patent, see Patents, § 275. II. NOMINAL DAMAGES. For breach of contract by seller, see Sales, § 418. III. GROUNDS AND SUBJECTS OF COMPENSATORY DAMAGES. (A) Direct or Remote, Contingent, or Prospective Consequences or Losses. In actions for causing death, see Death, $$ 87101. |