Santa Fe new Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1898-1951, 1909-09-01


/ journed last evening until January 4.
1917.
In case 40. 1924. motion 10 retax
costs was granted. This was the
case of the Territory VS.. Ricardo Al
arid, and something like $3.50 costs
| for jury, bailiffs, Interpreter. etc. had
been charged up to the defendant.
Opinions were handed down in the
| following cases:
U. S. v. Medina.
The judgment of the lower court
was reversed with directions TO
quash the third count OF the indict
ment and to grant new trial upon
the second count of the indictment, il
the case of the United States of
America, appellee. VS.. Jesus NJ. Me-
dina, appellant. No. 1909. tried before
Judge John R. McFie in the First Ju-
dicial District Court. A B. Renehan
and T. B. Catron appeared for the
appellant and L. S District Attorney
D. ]. Leahy, and his assistant, S. B.
Davis, Jr., for the United States.
The opinion is by Judge W, H. Pope.
Jesus NJ. Medina, the appellant, was
indicted upon three counts and found
guilty upon two counts for violating
the Z. S. pension laws and sent
enced to three years in the peniten-
tiary. The syllabus says
An tn, +I, +ary,,c
of the statute is sufficient only where
! by the statutory language the de-
| fendant is put upon fair notice of the
charge against him.
Under L. S. Rev. ST. Sec. ALAG. (as
amended by the act of July I. 1899,
which penalties the making of
| false or fraudulent affidavit. it is not
sufficient simply to allege that the
affidavit was false. There must be
clear averment of the respects in
which it is false, equivalent to the
assignment in perjury cases.
A name pleaded as Munnison and
proved as Munnicon is idem .sonans
and there is no variance.
Under U. s. Rev St, Sec. 4746 las
amended by the act of July 7, 1S9S)
which subjects to punishment one
who knowingly certifes, when not
true, that witness has been sworn
to an affidavit to be used in a pen
| sion case, administering the oath
Immediately before the taking down
/ of the statement Hereunder, equally
| with administering it after taking
down such statement is swearing the
| witness to such affidavit within the
statute. -
| 1t was error, therefore, for the trial
court to reject testimony for the de-
fendant tending to show that he ad-
ministered the oath to the witness
and the latter thereupon having TAX
EN- such oath Immediately dictated his
statement to defendant, such testi-
mony being material as showing a
compliance with the law and this
even though the signing by the wit
ness may have been postponed by i'll
ness to the next day. ~
Territory VS.. crary. G>'sl !
In case No. 1910, Territory of New
Mexico, Appellant, VS.. Hattie Hodg-
don Crary, ct al, appellees. Appeal
from the district court for Berna-
lilo county, the Judgment of the
court below was reversed and the
cause remanded The oDinion is by
! Associate Justice NJ. C. Mechem. The
| attorney general appeared for the
Territory and w. B. Childers for the
appellees. The original suit was a
| proceeding brought by the appellant
| to condemn certain land for the
use of the University of New Mexico
at Albuquerque. The petition was
dismissed in the lower court for the
reason that it brought in the name of
the Regents of the University and not
in the name of the Territory.
U. S. VS.. Sena.
| In No. 1909. Mariana F. Sena. ap-
pellant VS.. the United States of
| America, appeal from the district
court for the first judicial district, the
! judgment of the lower court is affirm
ed. John H. Knaebel and Frank w.
Clancy appeared for the appellant,
and U. S. Attorney W. H. H. Level
| lyn, E. s. Medler and David J. Leahy
for the appellee. The opinion is by
Associate Justice w. H. Pope. The
syllabus is as follows:
The bill of exceptions in criminal
case must, under c. L. Sec. S96. Be
settled and signed by the trial judge
not less than ten days before the
term of this court at which said
| canSe shall be first dnckated nnlnsr