State v. Maheras
| Decision Date | 28 May 1926 |
| Citation | 246 P. 304,42 Idaho 544 |
| Parties | STATE, Respondent, v. P. J. MAHERAS, Appellant |
| Court | Idaho Supreme Court |
CRIMINAL LAW - SEPARATION OF JURY - PREJUDICE PRESUMED FROM JURY'S SEPARATION.
Under C. S., sec. 9017, prejudice is presumed where jury in forgery prosecution separated after cause was submitted to them for consideration.
APPEAL from the District Court of the Sixth Judicial District, for Bingham County. Hon. Ralph W. Adair, Judge.
Conviction of forgery. Reversed and remanded.
Reversed and remanded with instruction.
Thomas & Andersen and Peterson & Coffin, for Appellant.
A. H. Conner, Attorney General, and John W. Cramer, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.
--The Attorney General confesses error on the ground that after the cause was submitted to them for consideration the jury separated. The record shows that such was the situation and the prosecuting attorney made no counter-showing before the trial court. Prejudice is thereby presumed. (C. S., sec. 9017; State v. Chacon, 36 Idaho 148, 209 P. 889.) Therefore the cause is reversed and remanded with instruction to grant a new trial.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Jester
...jury has not resulted in prejudice to the defendant. (State v. Burton, supra; State v. Chacon, 36 Idaho 148, 209 P. 889; State v. Maheras, 42 Idaho 544, 246 P. 304; State v. Lowe, 67 Kan. 72 P. 524; State v. Tilden, supra. ) After the cause had been finally submitted to the jury it was prej......