The daily appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1906-1907, 1906-11-16
SUPREME COURT DECISION
Continued from Page 81
lection to the same. The body OF
the indictment reads as follows:

Defendants Johnny, an Indian
Whose other name. ii any. is to the
Grand Jury unknown) and Joe lba-
pah, an Indian. Whose other name
if any. is to the Grand Jury unknoWn)
are accused by the Grand Jury of the
County of ElkO, State Of Nevada. by |
this indictment of the crime Of muir |
Ter. committed as follows, to wit:
That the said defendants. Johnn!
An Indian, and Joe Ibapah. an lndlal
IN or about the zULh day OF Decen
Der. A. y. 1905 in the County of Elko
State of Nevada, and before the find
ing of this Indictment, without au
thority Of law, feloniously, wilfully.
unlawfully and of their malice afore-
thought. killed a certain human being,
herein designated as Fred Foreman,
whose true name is to the Grand Jury
unknown, by striking, cutting and
.tabbing the said Fred Foreman with
knives; whereof and by means 81
,he striking, cutting and stabblrH
aforesaid. the said Fred Foreman
then and there died.
Counsel Tor appellants claim tnat
,he indictment is de1ecnve IN thie
Thai il does not in tne body thereof
e,.te that murder was
,,;.to|, Also that the speci-
&c acts alleged. viz, the cutting ec'.
are not alleged 10 nave peeh uoi0
with intent to XIII.
The indictment follows suostan.
tally the form suggested oS oul
sta.ute. Comp. Laws. Sec 4-'''
the ac, charged as the o1ense Is
ne ,s az. n,aar1v and distinctly set
49, ~ ordinary and concise lal-
.o' ~ a,s II snch manner as 10
"i7 verso, of common under
.''" ii,n 1,now what was intended
n,",i'-, lith .,,cl, . Jecree OF certainty
-'"" =. n[,ahIa = court to pronounce
.,.4.r,,a,,+ rnor, \ conviction ACCORDING
7hn ,ir-,t Of the case and i Is
sufficient. Comp. Laws,
-h'l
sec 4-y'' ,, ,,d rested IT.
. Aver az 49, dafo,dan+ John
case eo"hSo' hi. ,1iont. also
~ ahn'",'o l,o5,a.. moved fha'
rested, ana! ol ms 80 ,1,o irr- AZ tki:
fne case ~ +asti,,on[ Is Offered
IN a1,a1t of the defendan. Ibapah.
Connsel eh a1'ina mi. motion. tina
reason Tor Nldl>in@ fnr nanah in
MI. iaptI ~ ,ofc,d.n- IDapal
forms NE 'H' =, ~. avn behalf
will take the lal1' 80 .a-+;,oouv vii
ana he.le!e 80 .' , aofondanr John
be prejudlclal 10 Ihe "0'N
ny" .;o,o =
The court. el'2F 'ahln7 - on,
CONSIDER the m ,i"n' oehiSn
.his ruling is assigned as 49,,
Sections 800 TO 80 li'' IHaS 1avs
Criminal Prac-loe AZ. a. fellows
Secs -,23-452p proNlu1 Two q
more defendants are Join1S ,a inintl
for any ohehse od cause shown b
tried. ullleaa va aofonse the cour
the prosecution or deleh'e'
shall other"ise Sc, when Two or m IL
4"2e- sec oo1 in the same il
persons are lnciuueo "a, Of anv tim
dictment, the co", l-' t,r cone int
before the de1enuah' I NO.; Of tn
his defense. on the app,i' anr aefen,
an, to be discharged ifo" u. tn f,
ment, th'I' ne '''"
the people. az, who, two c
1927. Sec. 90 i"oluded in tn
more persons and the court is {
same lndlctnien, oa,rd TO a particuls
opinion ,ha 1,a an is not sufficient ev
defendant n ,ne' h m on his defense.
a ,nn or 10 phi him to be discharged fro
shah o, ,:o.,,,ant before the evlden'
me inaic,iie' c,osed that he M
shall be deemen tis codefendant"
he witness witness 1of io nrt addicted vii
A aelehuan' ;n,ands to demand
another WIZ WIZ nust make his motto
separate trlai nus" nus. nf tho Jury
before the formation " NcI,ane,
commenced. 'o'a'e
New. $50 ..oa tho defenda,
To nave permi, Tue; c .n SUBMIT,
Johnny to nave ,,S the conclusi>
and Determined uI'' wound. in effet
of the so,ate case "on an,ra:e ri;
have given nun a bpva been
which would not on1S i, atatnte. b
plain violation OF 'ne orror so far
might have neeh l''.', ,co,.rod
ihapah's case | hn5on Do[ johnny
oil