State v. Jack
| Decision Date | 30 June 1916 |
| Docket Number | 21969 |
| Citation | 72 So. 429,139 La. 885 |
| Court | Louisiana Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE v. JACK et al |
L Robert Rivarde, of Hahnville, for appellants Stewart and gay.
A. V Coco, Atty. Gen., and L. H. Marrero, Jr., Dist. Atty., of New Orleans (V. A. Coco, of Marksville, of counsel), for the State.
Priestly Jack, Fed Stewart, and Joe Gay were arrested on the 6th of March and lodged in jail. Eleven days later, on the 17th, an indictment was found against them. On that same day they were arraigned. Priestly Jack pleaded guilty; the other two not guilty; and their case was fixed for trial for the 22d. They did not ask for the appointment of counsel to defend them. Relatives of theirs seem to have taken an interest in securing counsel for them, for on the 11th counsel wrote to the district attorney from a neighboring parish to know about the status of the case, and for what day it would be fixed for trial, and the clerk of court answered the letter, informing counsel that the case was fixed for the 22d. On the night of the 21st the two accused employed other counsel. This other counsel, Mr. Rivarde, when the case was called up for trial on the 22d, moved for a continuance on the ground that he had been employed but the night before and had not had time to prepare the defense. The court offered to reassign the case for the next day. The offer was refused, as not affording sufficient time. The court then offered to reassign the case for the second day thereafter. Counsel said he could not accept this, because his presence would be required in the Supreme Court on that day. The court then ordered the case to be proceeded with.
No suggestion is made that the time was too short to have procured the attendance of the witnesses, or that the accused have suffered in any way, except that the time was too short in which their counsel could have prepared for their defense. We must adhere to the rule that continuances are largely within the discretion of the trial court.
The indictment contains two counts, a first count for burglary, and a second for larceny. During the trial discovery was made that the second count, instead of beginning, 'And the grand jurors aforesaid upon their oaths aforesaid do further present' etc., according to the usual form, began, 'and the district attorney further gives the court to understand and be informed,' etc. In other words, the second count began in the form usual in an information filed by the district attorney instead of in that of an indictment by the grand jury. The court ordered the words 'district attorney' to be stricken out, and the words 'grand jurors aforesaid' to be inserted in lieu thereof. To this change the accused reserved a bill. The court was of opinion that section 1047, Rev....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Dallao
... ... 19] ... 156 La. 985, 101 So. 386; State v. Glauson, 165 La ... 270, 115 So. 484 ... The ... complaint that there is no evidence of the whereabouts of ... accused on the night of the robbery is not a comment upon the ... failure of the defendant to testify. State v. Jack, ... 139 La. 885, 72 So. 429 ... Defendant ... Dallao complains that the trial judge overruled his objection ... when the district attorney stated to the jury in his argument ... that he wanted to read some facts from the case of State ... v. Taylor, 173 La. 1010, 1038, 139 So ... ...
-
State v. Lofton
... ... 521; State v ... Pointdexter, 117 La. 380, 41 So. 688; [164 La. 502] ... State v. Douglas, 116 La. 524, 40 So. 860; State ... v. Roberson, 133 La. 991, 63 So. 492; State v ... Hollingsworth, 134 La. 554, 64 So. 409; State v ... Sinigal, 138 La. 469, 70 So. 478; State v ... Jack, 139 La. 885, 72 So. 429 ... In the ... case of State v. Murry, 136 La. 253, 66 So. 963, ... this court held that: ... "A motion for a continuance, based upon the absence of ... one and the want of preparation of another of defendant's ... attorneys, when he is also ... ...
-
State v. Bentley
...which no inference can be reasonably drawn that it was intended to allude to the defendant's failure to take the stand. See, State v. Jack, 139 La. 885, 72 So. 429; State v. Varnado, 126 La. 732, 52 So. 1006; State v. Robertson, 133 La. 806, 63 So. 363; State v. Lewis, 156 La. 985, 101 So. ......
-
State v. Roberson
... ... defense is a matter left to the sound discretion of the trial ... judge, and his ruling will not be disturbed on appeal, unless ... manifestly prejudicial. State v. Eaton, 144 La. 582, ... 80 So. 884; State v. Murry, 136 La. 253, 66 So. 963; ... State v. Jack, 139 La. 885, 72 So. 429 ... In ... State v. Chitman, 117 La. 950, 42 So. 437, the court ... "There ... was an interval of six clear days between June 7th, when ... counsel was assigned to the accused, and June 14th, when the ... case was finally called for trial, and we ... ...