Case Name: STATE v. LEE
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1906-02-26
Citations: 116 La. 607
Docket Number: No. 15,940
Parties: STATE v. LEE.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Reports
Volume: 116
Pages: 608–616

Head Matter:
(40 South. 914.)
No. 15,940.
STATE v. LEE.
(Feb. 26, 1906.
On Rehearing, May 21, 1906.)
1. Criminal Law—Appeal—Defective Record-Remand.
Where many steps necessary to the regularity of the proceedings were probably taken, but the minutes fail to show the fact, the court may, in furtherance of justice, remand the case, with leave to the trial court to correct the minutes so as to conform to the truth.
[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 15, Cent. Dig. Criminal Law, §§ 2903, 2904.]
2. Same—Imperfect Record—Oeetioeari.
The state, as appellee in a criminal prosecution, is not responsible for defects in the transcript of appeal, and, though this court may not be willing to affirm a conviction unless it appears to have been legally obtained, it is unwilling to set aside a valid conviction merely because, by the negligence of the clerk of the trial court, such transcript has been imperfectly prepared; hence, it is well settled that the writ of certiorari may be used as an auxiliary process in order to obtain a perfect transcript.
[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 15, Cent. Dig. Criminal Law, §§ 2911-2915.]
3. Exceptions, Bills of—Signing—Rules of Court.
Judges of the district courts are authorized to establish rules of practice in their courts, where the law is silent, and the establishment of a rule, requiring bills of exception, in criminal cases, to be presented for signature not later than the day following that upon which they are reserved, is a competent exercise of that authority ; the rule being neither in conflict with law, oppressive, nor unreasonable.
4. Criminal Law—Trial.
The prosecuting officer and the counsel for the defense, in a criminal trial, have equally the right to submit to the jury the conclusions suggested to their minds by the evidence adduced.
[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 14, Cent. Dig. Criminal Law, §§ 1663-1667.]
5. Same —New Trial —Errors by Interpreter.
Where an interpreter has been accepted by the defense, in a criminal trial, and, after having been sworn, has acted throughout the trial, without objection, the charge, based upon the ex parte affidavit, annexed to a motion for new trial, of á person who is not produced at the hearing of the motion, that the testimony was not correctly interpreted, is entitled to no consideration, as against evidence showing the interpreter to be a man of standing, known to the court, and as against the testimony of the interpreter to the effect that he interpreted correctly.
6. Same—Appointment of Interpreter.
The objections, that an interpreter, who has been accepted by both parties, and has acted throughout the trial, was not legally appointed, and that the court was not legally organized, because a deputy clerk acted as minute clerk, without having' been appointed to that position, come too late when urged for the first time in a motion for new trial.
7. Same—Remarks of Prosecuting Attorney.
Where, among the witnesses in a criminal case, there are Italian subjects, called on behalf of the state, and American citizens, both white and negroes, called on behalf of the defendant, the remark, by the district attorney, in his argument before the jury, “You must believe the testimony of these two white boys—two American citizens” (referring to two witnesses called on behalf of the defendant), may be regarded as merely a means of distinguishing the witnesses and is not, necessarily, to be taken as an appeal to prejudice, based on either race or nationality, injuriously affecting the rights of the defendant.
[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 14, Cent. Dig. Criminal Law, §§ 1670, 1675.]
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Appeal from Fifteenth Judicial District Court, Parish of Calcasieu; Edmund Dennis Miller, Judge.
Robert Lee was convicted of murder, and appeals.
Affirmed.
Alfred Michael Barbe, Robert Lewis Knox and Robert Raymond Stone, for appellant. Walter Guión, Atty. Gen., and Leland Hugh Moss, Dist. Atty. (Lewis Guión, of counsel), for the State.

Opinion:
PROA^OSTY, J.
The clerk certifies that the record in this case contains a correct transcript of the minutes. If so, the judgment must be set aside, or the minutes must be corrected, for they do not show that the court was ever opened, and only inferentially do they show that the judge was ever present; and, although the case purports to have been tried on an indictment, they do not show that a grand jury was ever impaneled, or that a bill of indictment was ever returned into court.
Minutes of court may, even after appeal, be corrected so as to conform to the facts; and in furtherance of justice cases may be remanded for that purpose. State of Louisiana v. Green Howard, 34 La. Ann. 369; State of Louisiana v. Waldemar Bille, 35 La. Ann. 852; Godshaw & Plant v. Judges Court of Appeals, 38 La. Ann. 643; State v. Jos. Pierre, 39 La. Ann. 915, 3 South. 60; State v. Valere, 39 La. Ann. 1060, 3 South. 186.
It is therefore ordered, adjudged, and decreed that this case be remanded to the lower court, with leave to the lower court to correct its minutes so as to conform to the truth in the several respects herein above noted; and that thereafter the case be sent back to this court for proper action.