Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1830-07-19
ta,r. and noi for he Superior Court Of Lynch.

| burg.
4th. Because the record does not state for
ufiaf Court they were 50 i,npsanelsd a. sworn
--nof does IL state thai they ~ere 30 inpsaaei-
! led and sworn for any Court.
s. Because there Is no Indictment recorded
fnaod by y Grand jury for the Computation of
Lyachburg nor hen. VI At what term IL was
ioaaJ and presented.
q h. Because there is no indictment IN fact
! found aud presrned ,o the Craud Jury for the
Corporation Of Lynehbnrg aud,
7tlI. Because there IS error IA the verdict, In
this thr jury find the prisoner guilty of mnr
der IN the " = Degree whrn their finding as
10 the degree of guilt ought 10 have been writ
ten nj full leugth.
The motion Ia arrest OF judgment was over.
ruled and the Superior Court pronounced
judgment that the prisoner be hanged aud that
execution Of the judgment be had On the l6is
day Of July ne1t.
| 10 this judgment OF death, Johnson. as
counsel for the prisoner, asked writ Offers
| Tor
June 23d.--Judge MAY delivered The opinion
of the Court, TO the following effect:
lsi. As 10 this being a case of murder in the
frat degree The Court has re-cousidered its
opinion upon this point. aud examined the all
litIonnI ev idence adduced. We were OF opin.
ion AT The last term, that the facts appearing
on ie record, fully established n " wiiful, de.i-
brraie aud p,sm-diiaied killing" There is
nothing IN The ntD testimony" ~ change Mi
opinion.
ID As 10 The objections 10 the three jurors
discovered after the verdict The Court al the
last term, held that When Juror having been
sworn on his rou dire declares that he had
heard various ieperis Of The Ease. anl IN CON
yersat,on wi h others. had expressed an opinion
of the probable result. but had no bias or pre-.
jndice which could prevent his giving the prs.
oner a fair trial, and therenpon, the prisoner,
without further enquiry Consents to be tired by
the juror, aud being afterwards found guilty,
moves the Court for new trial, because oil
opIu,ons previously expressed by 'hc nror, such
a mutton Is addressed to the sound discretion
of the Court and II be OF opinion that The iu.
ror has acted with integrity aud inpartaliIy,
and that tue verdict IS correct upn The merits
II new trial ought 40, TO be gran,ed.-The
Court has deliberately reviewed Tbs opniun,
nnd has no disposition TO disturb the decision
IN he HBiied erieni IN Vhich II is here stated.
The ueD erid.nre' which has bsen adduced
applied 10 the juror dHgie only, and it tends 4
exhibit his cunduc, and character IN more
lAsorable aspect.
81. ASin the errors assigned in arrest oi
judgment. IL T. sufficient answer TO the lat,
ID, ID, 4h, 9th and tilb of these errors thai il
appears by the record, that al July term, 1929.
ofthe Superior Court Of Lynchburg, the Grand
Jury were duly sworn ~ The usual and legal
form IN TINT Courl as a Grand Jary of inquest
for the body. OF the orpora'ion Of Lynchbnrg,
aud hat this Grand Jury flund the lndictmrnt
| against The prisoner. II IS moi necessary mat
the indic,mrn, should Itself shew At what ii ne
II was found and 1t is not necessary lhet ii
hr recorded NJ foil length in the order book
As To the objection that the jury used the cou
traction Isl, instead Of the word frait appears
that IN The verdict which was recorded aud
then read in open Court 10 the Jury. this " ord
!. property written and recorded in letters, so
that whether the objection would otherwise
have been available OF not, this Is no error in
the verdict.
The petition for writ of error was; there
fore rejected'
III Is deemed unnecessary in this report tosate
the testimony contained IN the bill of exceptions.