The Daily Ardmoreite. [volume] (Ardmore, Okla.) 1893-current, 1908-10-27
CRIMINAL COURT DECISION
JOHNSON COLORED MUST HANG

seven weeks. during which time the
defndant has been represented by
counsel, the application is addressed
to the sound discretion Of the court.
an his action is not subject to re-
view In the absence of showing
OF abuse OF this discretion.
Fourth.
/. Under the statute but one
change of Judge can be had.
g The fact that the regular Judge
of a district may hold court in the
same district and at the same time
that special Judge is trying a
case In no manner affects the jn-
risdiction OF the special Judge to try
such case.
3. Objections 90 alleged errors,
not jurisdictional committed during
a trial. must be made in apt time,
so as to allow the trial court to
rule upon the objections before ac-
tion is taken. II Is too late 10 com
plain after the trial is ended.
Fifth.
! 1. An application for n change
OF venue is addressed TO the sound
discretion OF the trial Judge, and in
the absence of an abuse of this DIS
erection his Judgment is not subject
to review.
The burden Is upon the defend
ant to clearly show. upon an ap-
pllcation for change Of venue.
his inability to obtain a fair and
impartial trial in the county in
which the offensc was committed.
3. See facts in opinion of court.
which did not constitute suf'-
cient showing to warrant a change
OF venue
sixth.
l. The fact that a Juror statel,
on his voir dire examination, that
he has previously sat as a juror
upon the trial of a murder case,
does not render him subject to
challenge. upon the ground of i'm
piled bias.
.. The fact that n Juror may have
formed or expressed an opinion as
to the guilt or innocence of dc
fendant. founded upon rumor, or
reading newspapers, does not dis.
qualify his as n juror in the case.
| 81
that such Juror can and will. not.
withstanding such opinion, act i'm.
partially and fairly. and basr his
verdict alone, upon tho testimony
of the witnesses and the lnytlnc
tions of the court.
. II was proper tI alllw counsel
for defendant 70 inquire as to what
was the verdict re,d,raI " the
in'y OF which th Ilror Willis,
had been member, in order that
they might intelligently exercise
peremptory challenge.
Seventh.
When a defendant seeks a new
court erred IN the admission of evi.
dence against him, he should set
out in his motion for a new trial.
the evidence objected 20 and also
/. give the name of the witnesses. and
so directly call the attention of the
trial court TO the ground of the oh.
lection that the error, II any, can
be passed on intelligently; other.
wise the court would not know
what particular objection counsel
was relying upon.
Eighth.
motion for a new trial upon
the ground that the court erred in
refusing TO give instructions re.
quested by the defendant, or in mis-
directing the jury as TO the law in
the case, should set out fully, the
instructions given, which are com.
plained of as improper 4 general
allegation OF error In this respect is
insufficient.
Ninth.
!. When n defendant has been
tried and convicted of an offense
and a new trial has been granted
him, and upon his being placed up
on trial on the same indictment
again, a plea of former jeopardy
based upon the first conviction,
does not present a defense in the
case.
?. When plea of former leopard
does not state facts which consti
tute a defense, 1t is not error for
the trial court to refuse Ia direct
the jury 10 find a special verdict
on such plea, but 1t should be
stricken from the record of the
case