State v. Battey
| Decision Date | 13 June 1911 |
| Citation | 32 R.I. 475,80 A. 10 |
| Parties | STATE v. BATTEY. |
| Court | Rhode Island Supreme Court |
Exceptions from Superior Court, Providence and Bristol Counties; Charles F. Stearns, Judge.
Frank E. Battey was convicted of operating an automobile at an excessive speed, and be brings exceptions. Cause remitted to the superior court for further proceedings.
William B. Greenough, Atty. Gen., and Harry P. Cross, Second Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
Mumford, Huddy & Emerson and George H. Huddy, Jr., for defendant.
This is a criminal complaint brought in the district court of the Fifth judicial district, under Gen. Laws 1909, c. 86, § 11, charging that on July 10, 1910, at Bristol, the defendant "did willfully and unlawfully operate and cause to be operated a motor vehicle, to wit, an automobile, on a public highway, in said town of Bristol, to wit, Hope street, beginning at a point on said highway, at or near the residence of Mrs. Raymond Paull, thence along said highway in a southerly direction, the territory contiguous thereto being closely built up, at a rate of speed greater than 15 miles per hour, against the statute and the peace and dignity of the state." In the district court the defendant pleaded guilty, was sentenced, and took an appeal to the superior court. In the superior court the defendant pleaded not guilty and waived jury trial, and the case was heard and decided by a justice of said court without a jury. In the course of saiu trial the defendant took certain exceptions to the rulings of said justice, and duly filed and prosecuted the same, and the case is now before this court for the consideration of said exceptions.
But we are confronted with a question affecting the jurisdiction of the superior court in the premises which must be disposed of at the outset. Did the superior court have jurisdiction to hear this criminal appeal without a jury, even though the defendant had waived his right of trial by jury? ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Singer v. United States, 42
...Arnold v. Nebraska, 38 Neb. 752, 57 N.W. 378 (1894); In re McQuown, 19 Okl. 347, 91 P. 689, 11 L.R.A.,N.S., 1136 (1907); State v. Battey, 32 R.I. 475, 80 A. 10 (1911); State v. Hirsch, 91 Vt. 330, 100 A. 877 (1917); Mays v. Commonwealth, 82 Va. 550 (1886). Some state courts interpreted thei......
-
State v. Fagan
...v. Camby, 209 N.C. 50, 182 S.E. 715; In re McQuown, 19 Okl. 347, 91 P. 689; Commonwealth v. Hall, 291 Pa. 341, 140 A. 626; State v. Battey, 32 R.I. 475, 80 A. 10; Huey v. State, 88 Tex.Cr.R. 377, 227 S.W. 186; State v. Hirsch, 91 Vt. 330, 100 A. 877; State v. McCaw, 198 Wash. 345, 88 P.2d 4......
-
In re Application of Kortgaard
...72 Neb. 761, 101 N.W. 1007, 9 Ann. Cas. 1181; Re Fouton, 55 Neb. 705, 76 N.W. 448; Arnold v. State, 38 Neb. 745, 57 N.W. 379; State v. Battey, 32 R.I. 475, 8 A. 10. In common-law sense a less or greater number than twelve is not a jury; diminishing the number of jurors impairs the right of ......
-
Commonwealth v. Hall
...has held that the trial court has no jurisdiction to try a case without a jury, saying the provision of the law is mandatory: State v. Battey, 32 R. I. 475, 80 Atl. Repr. Statements on this subject, although the question of an express waiver of trial by jury was not involved, are to be foun......