Meredeth v. People of State
| Decision Date | 31 January 1877 |
| Citation | 1877 WL 9416,84 Ill. 479 |
| Parties | MAJOR MEREDETHv.THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
WRIT OF ERROR to the Circuit Court of McLean county; the Hon. THOMAS F. TIPTON, Judge, presiding.
Major Meredeth was indicted at September term, 1876, of the McLean county circuit court, for the murder of George Murphy. The indictment contains three counts--first, charging the killing to have been done with a gun; second, with an ax, and third, with a weapon to the grand jury unknown. On being arraigned, accused entered a plea of not guilty. At next term of court, the cause was tried before a jury, who found defendant guilty, and that he suffer death as a penalty for the crime committed. Motions for a new trial and in arrest of judgment were severally overruled, and the court sentenced defendant to be hung until he was dead. Evidence as to the character of the homicide, when committed, and of circumstances tending to inculpate accused, was given, but, as the merits of the case are not discussed in the opinion of the court, it will not be necessary to make any statement of the testimony.
Contained in the record are a number of affidavits in support of the motion for a new trial, from which it appears the judge of the circuit court before whom the cause was tried, during the argument before the jury, “was absent for nearly two days from the court room, and employed in the trial of other causes, in a room at the opposite side of the court house.” Accused was not asked, and it does not appear he ever gave, his consent to the absence of the judge during the progress of the trial, and, while some conflict appears, the weight of the testimony seems to be, it was with the consent of one or both counsel for defense. It was during the argument of the case the judge was out of the court room, in another part of the building, and, while so absent, his place on the bench was occupied successively by two members of the bar. On two days, court was adjourned by order of the members of the bar presiding, instead of the judge.
One affidavit shows that, during the trial, no shot had been found in the body of deceased, nor was any testified to by any witness, and defendant's counsel believed none could be found, and based their argument for the defense upon that fact, but that, after the close of their argument, a bystander, with the use of a jack-knife, discovered what appeared to be a shot in a piece of skull that had before been handled by the jury, and that the same piece of skull was again submitted to the jury by the State's Attorney, in making his closing speech for the prosecution.
Another affidavit is to the effect, that, in consequence of the absence of the judge, the proper degree of order was not preserved in the court room; that articles previously introduced in evidence were allowed to be handled in the sight and nearly in the hearing of the jury, and that, when the shot was discovered in the skull, it was seized by the spectators, and passed from one excited...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Patterson
...the judge was in another part of the same building. It is no less error than if he had been in another country." Quoting Meredeth v. People, 84 Ill. 479, 482 [1877]. Furthermore, automatic reversal will deter judges from being absent from any part of a trial in progress. Such a rule "will e......
-
Peri v. State
...and closing arguments); State v. Beuerman, supra (judge absent ten minutes during defense counsel's closing argument); Meredeth v. People, 84 Ill. 479, 482 (1877) ("It makes no difference [that] the judge was in another part of the same building. It is no less error than if he had been in a......
-
People v. Wilson
...the law of the case. This was a constitutional and substantial right of which no court could properly deprive them.’ Also, see Meredeth v. People, 84 Ill. 479. In North v. People, 139 Ill. 81, 28 N.E. 966, 970, referring to the part of the Criminal Code above quoted (par. 730), it was said:......
-
People v. Vargas
...cross-examination of Vittori amounted to harmless error. The appellate court misinterpreted this court's decisions in Meredeth v. People, 84 Ill. 479, 482-83 (1877), Thompson v. People, 144 Ill. 378, 381, 32 N.E. 968 (1893), and Schintz v. People, 178 Ill. 320, 326, 52 N.E. 903 (1899), as h......