Territory v. Collins
| Decision Date | 31 May 1889 |
| Parties | Territory v. Collins. |
| Court | South Dakota Supreme Court |
Error to district court, Walsh county; Charles F. Templeton, Judge.
On the trial at which defendant was convicted of murder the prosecuting attorney, in addressing the jury, remarked as to what could be shown if they went outside of the case. Objection was immediately made, and exception granted, and the court charged the jury to consider nothing outside the evidence. As far as appeared from the record, nothing further was done with reference to the remarks of the attorney. Defendant brings error. Affirmed.W. J. Hughes, J. H. Hill, and T. D. O'Brien, for plaintiff in error. Johnson Nickens, Atty. Gen., for defendant in error.
The judgment in this case is affirmed, the court holding that while the question asked the witness Anderson as to whether or not he was drunk was proper cross-examination, yet there was no reversible error, as he was permitted to answer the question, in effect, at another time. The objectionable remarks of the attorney for the prosecution to the jury are not saved by the record so as to be reviewed by this court.
All concur, except Templeton, J., not sitting, and Crofoot, J., not voting.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Reilly
... ... v. State, 72 Miss. 997, 17 So. 278; Pettus v ... State, 58 Tex. Crim. Rep. 546, 137 Am. St. Rep. 978, 126 ... S.W. 868; Collins v. State, 13 Fla. 651; Bond v ... People, 39 Ill. 26; Newton v. State, Miss. , 12 ... So. 560; State v. Porter, 74 Iowa 623, 38 N.W. 514; ... are entitled to have all objections specifically pointed out ... People v. Hill, 3 Utah 334, 3 P. 75; Flohr v ... Territory, 14 Okla. 477, 78 P. 565; Rev. Codes 1905, ... Section 8912; Penal Code 1877, Section 377; Rev. Codes 1899, ... Section 7177; Bassett v. State, ... ...
-
The State v. Hoff
...the state's attorney during the trial must be made at the time they occur, in order to present the question for review. Territory v. Collins, 6 Dak. 234, 50 N.W. 122. intent may be inferred and presumed from the doing of a wrongful and fraudulent act. A person intends the ordinary consequen......
-
State v. Holburn
...the same, such act or refusal of the court could be brought to the attention of the court upon appeal. 12 Cyc. 585; Territory v. Collins, 6 Dak. 234, 50 N.W. 122; Bradshaw v. State, 17 Neb. 147, 22 N.W. 361; State v. Biggerstaff, 17 Mont. 510, 43 Pac. 709; notes to People v. Fielding, 46 LR......
-
State v. Pray, 7253.
...it was error to refuse to permit him to answer. It follows, therefore, that the error, if any, was without prejudice. Territory v. Collins, 6 Dak. 234, 50 N. W. 122. The sufficiency of the evidence not being reviewable upon this record, and the other assignments showing no prejudicial error......