State v. Perry

Decision Date23 March 1896
Docket Number12,070
Citation19 So. 684,48 La.Ann. 651
CourtLouisiana Supreme Court
PartiesSTATE OF LOUISIANA v. WILLIAM PERRY, ALIAS WILLIAM LEWIS, ALIAS WILLIAM WILLIAMS

Submitted March 14, 1896

APPEAL from the Criminal District Court for the Parish of Orleans. Moise, J.

M. J Cunningham, Attorney General; Charles A. Butler, District Attorney, and John J. Finney, Assistant District Attorney for Plaintiff, Appellee.

Conrad G. Collins, for Defendant, Appellant.

OPINION

NICHOLLS C. J.

An extract from the minutes of the Criminal Court of January 14 1896, shows that "the Assistant District Attorney being present and the defendant, William Perry, etc., being placed at the bar of the court in custody of the sheriff, the State and the defendant being ready for trial, the jury was accepted, empaneled and sworn -- certain witnesses were examined on the part of the State and cross-examined by the defendant -- the defendant testified on his own behalf and was cross-examined by the State, and after hearing the evidence and instructions of the court the jury returned a verdict against the defendant, finding him guilty as charged."

On the 16th an attorney representing defendant filed an application on his behalf for a new trial upon the following ground:

1. Because the accused had an attorney at law duly retained for his defence and he was tried without an opportunity of communicating with his said attorney or of having said attorney to represent him.

2. Because his said attorney sought to communicate with defendant while confined in the parish prison, but that another prisoner who answered to the named of Willie Lewis, by which name defend- was known and by which name said attorney asked to see defendant, was brought from a cell by the deputy criminal sheriff to his counsel, who was thereby mislead and believed, as he had the right to believe, that he was speaking to Willie Lewis the defendant, and that counsel was informed by said other Willie Lewis that he did not need his said attorney's services; that he had employed Mr. Lionel Adams as his counsel. Whereupon said defendant's counsel left the prison, believing that defendant had counsel, and defendant was produced in court by the criminal sheriff, and had to stand his trial without the assistance of counsel, and was deprived of the right granted him by law of being defended by his attorney so retained by him.

3. Because of said action of said deputy criminal sheriff defendant has been deprived of a constitutional right, and surprised into a trial when he had counsel to defend him who could have advised defendant and secured to him a proper representation of his defence before the court.

4. Because defendant had a good defence in his behalf, and was deprived of the right to urge the same by said surprise and actions of the said officers of the court.

Attached to this motion were the affidavits of B. A. Michel and Conrad G. Collins, the latter being the attorney who filed the motion for a new trial, and who was referred to in the affidavit of Michel.

Michel deposed that he had retained Mr. Collins, as attorney for Willie Lewis, Saturday, January 11, 1896. That he handed to the attorney a card on which was written the words "Willie Lewis, cutting and wounding, parish prison." That card was the address given by him to Mr. Collins, to direct him to the defendant in the above entitled cause, who is the Willie Lewis known also as Perry and William.

Mr. Collins' deposition was first to the truthfulness of all the facts and allegations in the motion for a new trial. Deponent said he had read the affidavit of Michel; that the facts therein were true; that he visited the parish prison to confer with his client Monday, January 13, 1896, and asked for Willie Lewis, charged with cutting and wounding; that a prisoner also named Willie Lewis was brought to him, who declared that he had retained Lionel Adams as his attorney. Wherefore affiant left the parish prison, believing he had seen Willie Lewis, alias Perry, alias William, and that he had counsel.

But the court overruled the motion, stating that "the accused had announced in open court that he was ready for trial and made no mention to the court of the fact that his counsel was absent, or that he had engaged counsel, or that he desired counsel," and declaring that his failure to secure counsel was no ground for a new trial. Defendant's counsel excepted to this action and reserved a bill of exceptions, annexing thereto the application for a new trial.

In this bill the District Judge stated, as additional reasons for his ruling, that the defendant was an intelligent man and had no right to mislead the court into the trial of his case by announcing his readiness to go to trial and then move for a new trial because some one had employed counsel to defend him, who, by some accident, failed to do so; that the attorney was at fault, since the prisoner was...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • State v. Hilaire
    • United States
    • Louisiana Supreme Court
    • 13 Febrero 1950
    ...unless he requests it, State v. Kelly, 25 La.Ann. 381; State v. Ziord, 30 La.Ann. 867; State v. Doyle, 36 La.Ann. 91; State v. Perry, 48 La.Ann. 651, 19 So. 684, and authorities there cited; State v. Whitesides, 49 La.Ann. 352, 21 So. 540; State v. Sims, 117 La. 1036, 42 So. 494; State v. C......
  • State v. Dwyer
    • United States
    • Louisiana Supreme Court
    • 13 Julio 1925
    ... ... continuance will not be interfered with, unless a clear case ... of abuse of such discretion is presented. State v ... White, 156 La. 770, 101 So. 136; State v. Jack, ... 139 La. 885, 72 So. 429; State v. Cloud, 130 La ... 955, 58 So. 827, Ann. Cas. 1913D, 1192; State v ... Perry, 51 La.Ann. 1074, 25 So. 944 ... This ... court has specifically held that: ... "In the absence of any appearance on the record that the ... defendant requested the court ... [105 So. 411] ... to assign counsel, or applied for continuance on the ground ... of ... ...
  • State v. Murry
    • United States
    • Louisiana Supreme Court
    • 13 Febrero 1928
    ... ... 28, 1927 ... If ... defendants had not the means to employ counsel, it was their ... duty to have so advised the court at the time of their ... arraignment, and to have requested the appointment of an ... attorney to defend them. Revised Statutes 1870, § 992; ... State v. Perry, 48 La.Ann. 651, 19 So. 684; ... State v. Sims, 117 La. 1036, 42 So. 494 ... Defendants ... had ample time to secure the attendance of absent witnesses ... by compulsory process. The witnesses Ozelle Futch and Tommy ... Futch had been summoned, and the service made on these ... ...
  • Succession of Blancand
    • United States
    • Louisiana Supreme Court
    • 23 Marzo 1896
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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