The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1927-03-24
PAGE

3
order. when the custodian has 'knowl-
edge of the assignment Of the fund
ut the time he received the order.
Appeal from the District Court OF
Divide County. Hon. Geo. H. -Moell-
''1 %ff SsSsf;
Opinion Of the Court by Burr, ].
T.. J. Mcllraith: Crosby, N. D., At
torncy for lntervenors and Appel
lants.
II. A. Hanson, Bowbells, N. D., and
L. j. Palda, Jr., G. r. Brace, Minot,
N. D., Attorneys for the Plaintiff
and Respondent. 81
FROM sTUrsMAN COUNTY
State Of North Dakota. Plaintiff and
Respondent
Max Young. Defendant and Appel
LIANT
SYLLABUS:
!. "Mistrial" is equivalent to no
trial, and cannot be prcdicatcd on
the opening statement to the jury
merely because the States Attorney
relates what he expects to prove.
2. The defendant in a criminal
case has no constitutional or STATUE
tory right to a bill or particulars and
for reasons stated in the opinion it
is held the court did not err in deny
ing defendants demand for One.
). The limitation of cross-exam-
nation is within the sound discretion
Of the trial court and it is no abuse
Of such discretion to sustain 0bjcc-
ton to defendants demand for an
other rehearsal Of her story by the
prosecuting witness when she has
already related it in. full both on
direct and cross-examination and is
asked to tell it over again "the same
as you did before"
4. The States Attorney is COM
petent witness for the impeachment
Of the defendant to relate CONVEX
sation with the defendant on mat
ter relevant to the issue when the
defendant has denied such CONVERSE
ton.
s. There is no variance between
the pleadings and the proof in
prosecution for rape Of girl under
the age of consent, merely because
the evidence shows force and violence
were employed by the defendant at
the time of the commission of the
offense.
6. The trial court properly re-
fused to give 4 requested instruc-
ton to the effect that in determine
ing the credibility of the complaining
witness the jury may take into con-
sideration her morals ''in determin-
ing the weight and credit you will
give to her" A trial court has no
right to single out any witness as
the subject for special caution re-
gnrding credibility. CautiOnary in
t:.n H. 10 In III
! witnesses alike and it is not the
province Of the Court to single out
any witness and by special instruc-
tiOns intimate an opinion as to the
crcdihility. The credibility of wit
ncsses is for the jury alone.
Z. The jury is the sole judge of
the facts in 4 criminal case and
where testimony is such that reason
| able minds may believe charge al
slcgcd in the information has been
proven the verdict of the jury is con-
elusive lis to its sufficiency.
s. Evidence forgotten or other
| wise overlooked is not the newly
discovered evidence" required as
basis for new trial. and merely
| impeaching testimony is not ground
for Il new trial.
Appeal from the District Court Of
.''"e""s." @"u"|ss '""' ~" S""ao"-
Jus, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
Opinion Of the court by Burr. j.
p. w. Lanier, jamestown, North
Dakota, Attorney for Defendant and
Appellant.
Geo. F. Shafer, Attorney General,
: Bismarck, North Dakota, ar. RUSSELL
j ID. Chase, OF jamestown, North Da-
kota, Attorneys for the State.
FROM RURLEIGH COUNTY
Della Bishop and VIM. Vaughan,
Plaintiffs and Appellants
VS.
Depositors' Guaranty Fund Commits
sion, Defendant and Respondent.
SYLLABUS:
!. The writ of mandamus will not
issue to contEol the action of the
Depositors' Guaranty Fund Commits
| sion in the performance of its duties
! dcposit0rs against the Depositors'
! Guaranty Fund. Standard Oil Com
pany V. Engel, ct al, ......N. D.,
.., IN. w. .....
2. Certiorari will not lie to review
the action of the Depositors' Guar
anty Fund Commission in passing
upon the merits of claims of alleged
depositors against the Depositors'
Guaranty Fund.
Appeal from the District Court of
| Burleigh County, Hon. Fred Janson-
Jus, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
Opinion Of the court by Nuessle, j.
Lemke & Weaver, of Fargo, Attor-
neys for Appellants.
Geo. F. Shafer, Attorney General
l v0tr
General, of Bismarck, Attorneys for
Respondent.
FROM BURLEIGH COUNTY
Standard Oil Company, a corpora
! ton, Petitioner and Appellant
A. w. EnEel, ct al, as members of and
constituting the Depositors' Guar
| anty Fund Commission of the State
| of North Dakota, Defendants and
| Respondents.
SYLLABUS:
l. The Guaranty Fund Act, Chap
ter l26, S. L. 1917, amended and re-
enacted as Chapter 200, S. L. 1923,
providing for the creation and admin
istration of the Depositors' Guaranty
Fund for the purpose of insuring the
repayment of deposits made in banks
chartered and from time to time in
spected and examined by state au-
thority, reposes in the Guaranty
Fund Commission the power to pass
upon and finally allow or reject the
claims of alleged depositors against
the fund.
2. The Guaranty Fund Act en-
1 towering the Guaranty Fund Com
mission to pass upon and finally all
low or reject claims of alleged de-
positors against the Guaranty Fund
is not subject to the objection that
it is unconstitutional in that it de-
prives claimants against the fund Of
their property without due process
of law, vests judicial power in the
l -. aA,sas. .isA. 4.