Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Crimes-Procedure-Variance Between Indictment And Proof
Crimes-Procedure-Variance Between Indictment And Proof
Michigan Law Review
The plaintiff was convicted of burglary under an indictment alleging that the article stolen was the joint property of two persons. The proof disclosed that it was the sole property of one of them, but this variance was at no time called to the attention of the lower court. On appeal, held, such variance was not reversible error. People v. Oswald (Ill. 1930) 172 N.E. 819.
Appeal And Error-Judicial Distrust Of The Jury
Appeal And Error-Judicial Distrust Of The Jury
Michigan Law Review
A statute prescribed ten years in the state penitentiary as the minimum punishment for perjury committed on the trial of an indictment for a felony. In a prosecution for this offense, the trial court erroneously charged the jury that five years was the minimum punishment, to which the defendant excepted. Held, when defendant excepts to such instruction, it is reversible error for which a new trial will be granted. Roley v. State (Okla. Crim. App. 1930) 290 Pac. 195.