Weekly journal-miner., 1918-07-31

. 1 reasonable ground for appeal ! That thereafter, to-wit, on the 18th
 day of July. 1918. the Judge of said | Superior court, after considering said l petition. declined and refused to sign
 certificate of reasonable ground for
 appeal. and has denied defendant his
 right to bail in this case, pending the determination of said appeal ' That annexed to this petition and.
 made hereof are certified copies of
 the proceedings in the above entitled
 case above referred to, and the same
 are made a part of this application, all of which your petitioner prays will be considered part of this peti- tion
 That there is reasonable ground for this appeal for the following reasons. viz:
 1. Because the trial court overrul-
 ed and denied said defendants chal- lenge to the list and panel of jurors drawn by order of the court on the 9th day of July. 1918, said challenge being in writing, and for the reasons set forth in said challenge, the same being attached to petition for certifi-. cate of reasonable ground for appeal filed in said Superior court and here to attached as Exhibit A. ?. Because the trial court, after the exhaustion of the regular jury panel, over the objections of defendant, di-1 rected the clerk of said court on July l9. 1918. to place in the jury box and draw therefrom as jurors in the trial of said cause the following named persons:
 George R. Hackett, Nelson Betts.
 Frank Merka. Arthur J. Judd, Elza Pruitt. ]. F. MahOney, and George H.: Chapman, before the sheriff had made any return on the special venirc showing that said persons were sum- moned as jurors in said cause.
 }. Because thereafter. on July 10th. 1918. the court directed the clerk of
 said court to place in the jury box and draw therefrom as jurors Tn the trial of said cause the following nam ed persons, over the objections of de-
 fcndant:
 T. F. Zeigler. A. NJ. Crosby. C. C. Reid, Mike Chemas. Robert K. Porter. IT. l.. Wilson, w. I. Nelson, Bernard Curtis. J. L. Murdock. w. F. Rals- ton, Vim. Barclay, NJ. C. McNulty, A. l.. Smith. NJ. Diskin. and Sam Rus sel. before the Sheriff had made any return on said special venire show ing that said persons were summoned as jurors in said cause.
 Because the following named per sons were drawn from the jury box as jurors in said cause on the 9th and 10th days of July, 1918, over the ob- jections of defendant. before the sher- if had made his return on said ven- ire, showing the names of persons summoned to serve as jurors. uder and by virtue of said venire, to-wit:
 Geo. H. Chapman, Frank Merka. George R. Hackett, Mike Chemas. w. H. Jones, H. L. Wilson. J. F. Mahoney. E1za Fruit, w. I. Nelson. NJ. Diskiu, J. Burk, w. E. Ralston. VI. C. McNulty.
 ,. Because said defendant was compelled to accept jurors from an incomplete panel and before all jur- ors mentioned in said venire, who were residing in Yavapai County. could be served and summoned as jurors in said cause, and over the objections of defendant
 G Because of errors alleged in de- fendant's motion for a new trial, a copy of which is attached to petition for certificate of reasonable ground for appeal, filed in said Superior court and herto attached.
 7. Because the court denied de- fendant the right to prove by Mrs. Miller that some time during the Spring of 1917. in the City of Pres colt, she was introduced to R. J. Mil Ter, the deceased. at her husbands garage: that she then and there over heard conversation between Charlie Roth and R. J. Miller, deceased, in which Miller said. in substance and in fact, "I will get the biggest part of old man Stephens (meaning the co-defendant. Joe Stephens) money at which time Mir. Roth inquired, how will you get it." And in ans wer thereto, Mir Miller said, "you wait and sec Mrs. Stephens thinks a whole lot of me" Said information being imparted to the defendant and his father by said witness after the homicide.
 8. Because if the testimony of Mrs. Miller was not competent when first offered by the defendant, it did become competent in defendants sur -cbuttal testimony, the State having laid foundation and predicate there for in its rebuttal by testimony. wherein they sought to prove in re- Duttal that Miller. the deceased, had no designs on Mrs. Stephens and came to Prescott from Williamson ralley on the night of March 3lst for Dfher reasons and not for the Dur-