Stowe v. State

• Decision Date: 01 February 1891
• Citation: 2 Wash. 124,25 P. 1085
• Parties: STOWE v. STATE.
• Court: Washington Supreme Court

25 P. 1085

2 Wash. 124

STOWE v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Washington

February, 1891

Appeal from superior court, Pierce county.

Frank L. Kuhn and A. R. Heilig, for appellant.

W H. Snell, Pros. Atty., for the State.

DUNBAR J.

The defendant, upon the information of the prosecuting attorney of Pierce county, was tried for the murder of Enoch Crosby and on April 25, 1890, found guilty of murder in the second degree. On May 17, 1890, he presented his motion for new trial, based upon errors of the court, newly discovered evidence, and that the verdict was contrary to law and the evidence, which motion was overruled, and defendant, on same day, sentenced to imprisonment in the state penitentiary for 20 years. On June 11, 1890, his attorneys gave notice, in open court, of appeal to the supreme court of the state, which was duly entered upon the journal. Defendant's attorneys on the same day served the prosecuting attorney with notice that on June 23, 1890, they would appear before the judge that had tried the case, for the purpose of settling a statement of facts to be transmitted with the transcript of the cause to the supreme court. On the 16th day of June, 1890, defendant's attorneys presented and filed his petition setting forth that in order to prosecute his appeal it was necessary to make a transcript of the testimony, rulings, and charge of the court given at the trial a part of the statement of facts; that these were taken in shorthand by the official reporter of said court, and no long-hand transcript had been made thereof; that the reporter refused, on demand, to furnish a long-hand transcript thereof unless he was paid the sum of $100 in advance as part of his fees for making such transcript; that defendant had no means whatever, and could not procure the money to pay said sum; and praying the court to make an order directing the county commissioners of Pierce county to pay or advance said sum in payment of said fees. But the court, on the 16th of June, 1890, entered an order denying the prayer of the defendant, and refused to grant him the relief prayed for; to which order defendant on same day excepted, and exception was allowed. From this order defendant appealed, and gave notice of appeal in open court, June 23, 1890.

Appellant bases his claim upon section 22, art. 1, of the constitution of Washington, which reads as follows: "In criminal prosecutions, the accused shall have the right to appear and defend in person and by counsel; to demand the nature and cause of the accusation against him; to have a copy thereof; to testify in his own behalf; to meet the witnesses face to face; to have compulsory process to compel the attendance of witnesses in his own behalf; to have a speedy public trial by an impartial jury of the county...