Court Opinion

ID: 9807985
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 20:23:33.818911+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:06:49.383519
License: Public Domain

Walxer, J.,
dissenting: I do not understand the facts to be as stated
in the opinion of the Court. The judge held that there was a variance, and directed a verdict of acquittal, there being no dissent by the jury. This is common practice on the circuit and has been sanctioned by this Court. Whether the judge was right or wrong, the verdict of not gúilty having been entered, it cannot be stricken out, at least against the consent of the defendant, and he cannot be tried on that indictment again. It will be noticed that if it is stricken out, there will be no verdict left, though the jury had been fully charged with the case. The judge could not order a mistrial, which occurs always before verdict, but a new trial, and this could not be done, under the circumstances of this case. We cannot avoid the legal effect of the court’s action by calling it by the wrong name — a mistrial. I have no time, in the closing hours of the Court, to cite the authorities and demonstrate what I think is the clear error of the Court.