Anderson v. State
Citation | 38 A. 937,86 Md. 479 |
Parties | ANDERSON v. STATE. |
Decision Date | 02 December 1897 |
Court | Court of Appeals of Maryland |
Appeal from criminal court of Baltimore city.
Caleb Anderson was convicted of violating the lottery law, and appeals. Affirmed.
Thomas C. Ruddell, for appellant. Atty. Gen. Clabaugh and Henry Duffy, for the State.
Argued before McSHERRY, C.J., and BRYAN, PAGE, BRISCOE, and BOYD JJ.
On the 12th of April, 1897, the appellant, Caleb Anderson, was indicted and tried in the criminal court of Baltimore city for violating the lottery law of the state. Upon this trial the jury was not able to agree, and was discharged. Afterwards, on the 9th of June, he was again put upon trial on the same indictment. He filed the following plea The state demurred to this plea, and the demurrer was ruled good. The traverser was then tried upon the plea of not guilty, and, being convicted on the fourth and fifth counts of the indictment, has appealed from the judgment entered against him.
The principal question, then, for us to determine, is whether the discharge of the jury upon its failure to agree, in this case, constitutes a legal bar to a future trial. The law is well settled in this state, since the case of Hoffman v State, 20 Md. 432, that the discharge of a jury is a matter of discretion for the court, and that when, in the exercise of a sound discretion, it takes place, it presents no impediment to a second trial. In the case of Simmons v. U. S., 142 U.S. 149, 12 S.Ct. 171, Mr. Justice Gray speaking for the supreme court upon this question, says that the general rule of law upon the power of the court to discharge the jury in a criminal case before verdict was laid down by ...
To continue reading
Request your trial