Bismarck weekly tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1884-1943, 1900-05-04
|lN SUPREME COURT.
Supreme Court Hands Down Decisions
in a Number Of Interesting
Cases.
Sentence Of Barney Murphy for IS
Years Afirmed-New Trial for
Young.

in the penitentiary for robbery in the
first degree. Murphy was the man
who entered a farmers house and tor
tured him by burning the soles of his
feet to induce him to reveal the hiding
place of his suspected wealth. Two
errors were alleged at the trial, one
in not postponing the case to another
term of court and the other in instruc-
lions given to the jury. The syllabus
of the decision affirming the judgment
of the lower court is as follows:
Where after issue Joined in a Grim
inal action pending in the district
cburt the defendant is DESTROYS of OBJ
tanning the testimony Of a nonresident
witness in his own behalf and where
the defendant desires a postponement
of the trial or a continuance. of the ac-
ton over the term to obtain such tes-
timony it is incumbent upon him to
apply to the court OF judge upon no
tice to the county attorney for the is
suance of a commission out of and
under the seal of the court to take
such testimony.
Nor "a an application for a con-
tinuance or postponement to take such
nonresident testimony be granted ex-
cept in connection with an applica-
ton for a commission. The statute
regulates the practice in such cases
and it's provisions must be substan-
TALLY complied with. Revised Codes,
sections S3S55-S3S0.
Facts stated in the opinion consid-
cred and held that defendants appli-
cation for a continuance in this case
was properly denied.
Held further that the foundation for
the motion for a continuance in this
cast was insufficient in substance.
Held further that the facts stated
in this opinion that a verbal error in
the trial courts instructions to the
jury did not under the circumstances
in the case operate to the defendants
prejudice"
Harry Smith Young gets a new trial
from the court. Young was convicted
to the crime of arson, in the burning
of the mill at Glendale. He was sen
fenced to five years in the p%enitentiary
and is now under sentence there. The
syllabus of the opinion that grants
him a new trial is as follows:
An information under the statutes
of this state which ccuse the defend
ant of the crime Of arson and charges
facts constituting arson in the third
degree as defined by the statute, is
sufficiently specific as to the crime
charged, and does not accuse of one
crime and state facts constituting a
different crime.
In a criminal case where the evil
dence was entirely circumstantial the
giving of the following instruction,
towit: "The law requires the jury
to be satisfied of the defendants guilt
beyond a reasonable doubt but in or
der to warrant a conviction does not
require that you should be satisfied
beyond a reasonable doubt of each
link in the chain of circumstances rex
lied upon to establish the defendants
guilt. 1t is sufficient if taking the
testimony altogether, as a whole, you
are satisfied beyond a reasonable
doubt of the guilt of the defendant"
Held error.
This error was not cured by reason
of the fact that the court in other por-
tons of the instructions correctly
stated the doctrine of reasonable
doubt.
Appeal from the district court of
Dickey county, Hon. W. S.. Lauder,
judge.
George w. Parks and E. P. Perry
for appellants.
E. E. Cassels as states attorney, J.
F. Cowan as attorney general for re-
spondent.
The decision of the lower court in
the case of the State VS.. R%osencrans
from McHenry county is affirmed in
the following syllabus:
The recent personal possession of
stolen property not satisfactorily ex-
planned as evidential fact from which
completely in the larceny thereof may
be inferred.
Accordingly Held, that evidence of
possession of the stolen property,
which consisted of a mower and two
hay rakes, by the defendant within
ten days after it was stolen and at his
home sixteen miles from the place
where stolen, in connection with the
other evidence in the case sufficient
to uphold the verdict of the jury find
ing him guilty Of the larceny.
Failure to instruct the jury on a
particular phase of the evidence IAN
not be urged as %prejudicial error in
the absence Of a request so to do.
The fact that a sheriff or deputy
sheriff are sworn as witnesses in a
criminal case does not of itself operate
to disqualify them from acting as
bailiffs in charge of the jury during
their deliberations.
Appeal from the district court Of
McHenry county, Hon. D. E. Morgan,
judge.
w. j. Anderson for appellant.
John F. Cowan, attorney general,
A. J. Ames, states attorney for re-
%spondent.
The court has affirmed the decisions
of the lower court in the cases of State
VS.. Peoples from Walsh county, a
bastardy case; Magnusson VS.. Linwell
from Grand Forks county, and Mag
nusson VS.. Linwell' and G%ustafson,
and Northwood Bank VS.. Magnusson
from Grand Forks county.