Chavez v. Territory of Arizona

Decision Date25 June 1912
Docket NumberCriminal 301
Citation14 Ariz. 107,125 P. 483
PartiesN. B. CHAVEZ, Appellant, v. TERRITORY OF ARIZONA, Respondent
CourtArizona Supreme Court

APPEAL from a judgment of the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, in and for the County of Yavapai. Edward M. Doe Judge. Affirmed.

The facts are stated in the opinion.

Mr. E J. Mitchell, for Appellant.

Mr. G P. Bullard, Attorney General, for Respondent.

OPINION

FRANKLIN, C. J.

N. B. Chavez was indicted for murder, and under the indictment a verdict of murder in the first degree, fixing the penalty at death, was returned by the jury. The prisoner was sentenced to suffer death, and appeals.

The brief of appellant, and the two assignments of error therein, relate exclusively to alleged errors of the trial court with respect to its rulings on the admission of evidence. There is no bill of exceptions, and the reporter's transcript is not certified to by the trial judge.

However much we may dislike to refrain from passing upon the merits of an assignment of error, this court cannot disregard the plain provisions of the law with reference to what constitutes the record, and what may be considered on appeal to the supreme court. Paragraph 983 of the Penal Code provides: "The statute relating to exceptions, what constitutes the record, and the manner of making oral proof a part of the record in civil cases is hereby made applicable to all criminal cases." The statutes relating to the matters mentioned in the foregoing provision of the Penal Code will be found in paragraph 874, Revised Statutes of 1887, (chapters 17 and 19, title 17, Revised Statutes of 1901; section 15, chapter 74, Laws of 1907), and have been in force and effect for many years. The supreme court of the territory has repeatedly held, and we think correctly, that under these statutes the rulings of the trial court with respect to the introduction or exclusion of evidence cannot be reviewed on appeal to this court in the absence of a bill of exceptions, unless the trial judge certifies to the reporter's transcript, and that such statutes are as binding upon appellants and the court in criminal cases as in civil cases. Romero v. Territory, 12 Ariz 10, 95 P. 101; Molina v. Territory, 12 Ariz. 14, 95 P. 102. That the reporter's transcript may import absolute verity as to the matters complained of, the law requires the authentication thereof by the trial judge. This court is, therefore, precluded from considering the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Callaghan v. State
    • United States
    • Arizona Supreme Court
    • February 25, 1916
    ... ... continuance is granted. In Eytinge v ... Territory, 12 Ariz. 131, 100 P. 443, it is said: ... "The granting or withholding of a ... court has many times so declared. Chavez v ... Territory, 14 Ariz. 107, 125 P. 483; Perez ... v. Territory, 14 Ariz. 163, 125 P. 483; ... ...
  • Talley v. State
    • United States
    • Arizona Supreme Court
    • July 1, 1916
    ...that appellant has received the death sentence, we will treat the evidence as though it were regularly and legally before us. Besides, in the Chavez case this court said: being a criminal case where the death penalty was awarded, we have most carefully scrutinized the record as it is presen......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT