Law | Open Access Articles | Digital Commons Network™

The Right To Trial By Jury In Prosecutions For Petty Federal Offenses, Melville Stewart Dec 1932

The Right To Trial By Jury In Prosecutions For Petty Federal Offenses, Melville Stewart

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Trial--Polling The Jury--Manner Of Conducting, E. Gaujot Bias Dec 1932

Trial--Polling The Jury--Manner Of Conducting, E. Gaujot Bias

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Go to article

Criminal Law And Procedure - Preliminary Examination Dec 1932

Criminal Law And Procedure - Preliminary Examination

Michigan Law Review

A statute provided: "No information shall be filed against any person for any offense until such person shall have had a preliminary examination therefor as provided by law before a magistrate, unless such person shall waive such right. . . . " The defendant was complained against before a magistrate on a charge of grand. larceny. The magistrate refused to hold the accused on such charge but held him to answer on a charge of receiving stolen property. The prosecutor filed an information charging grand larceny. The defendant moved to quash the information on the ground that he had had …

Go to article

Equity-Injunction Against Criminal Proceedings Nov 1932

Equity-Injunction Against Criminal Proceedings

Michigan Law Review

The possessor of certain slot machines filed a bill in equity to enjoin police interference with their operation. Although the machines, as operated, sold mints for each coin played and occasionally vended tokens which allegedly had no exchange value, they could be changed, by the removal of a pin, into an actual gambling device. The court held in Chambers v. Bachtel, that the bill should be dismissed.

Go to article

Comment Upon Failure Of Accused To Testify, Robert P. Reeder Nov 1932

Comment Upon Failure Of Accused To Testify, Robert P. Reeder

Michigan Law Review

Last year the American Law Institute and the American Bar Association adopted resolutions declaring that when the defendant in a criminal trial does not testify the prosecution should be permitted to comment upon that fact. They urged the overthrow of a rule of law which have prevailed in the federal courts ever since accused persons were first permitted to give testimony, over fifty years ago, and which has governed the courts of forty-two out of the forty-eight states. The discussions which preceded the adoption of the resolutions have been published. In them the advocates of the change do not show …

Go to article

Constitutional Law-Criminal Procedure-Comment By Judge On Evidence Jun 1932

Constitutional Law-Criminal Procedure-Comment By Judge On Evidence

Michigan Law Review

In the recent case of People v. Kelly, the Illinois supreme court decided (two justices dissenting) that the common law right of a judge, in charging the jury, to comment on the evidence and advise as to the facts was not an essential attribute of trial by jury as it, existed at common law, and held that a statute limiting the charge strictly to matters of law was not an infringement of the right of trial by jury guaranteed by successive Illinois constitutions. The court also decided, in upholding the legislative enactment, that this restriction of the functions of …

Go to article

Crimes - Procedure - Indictment - Included Offense May 1932

Crimes - Procedure - Indictment - Included Offense

Michigan Law Review

Defendant was indicted for burglary with intent to commit larceny. The jury found him guilty of larceny. Held, reversed, burglary not being a compound felony including larceny. State v. Henderson (Iowa 1931) 239 N. W. 588.

Go to article

President Hoover's Recommendations - Waiver Of Right To Accusation By Grand Jury Indictment Apr 1932

President Hoover's Recommendations - Waiver Of Right To Accusation By Grand Jury Indictment

Michigan Law Review

In Illinois also the time between arrest and indictment is considerable. According to the figures of the Illinois Crime Survey the median time after preliminary hearing before indictment of persons who pleaded guilty ranged from thirteen days in Chicago to thirty-seven days in other parts of the state. An average of another two days is added by the time between arrest and preliminary hearing. In Missouri, too, the time interval is long. It seems reasonable to assume, therefore, that in the federal courts the time between arrest and indictment is at least as long, especially in districts where grand juries …

Go to article

Criminal Law - Federal Removal Proceedings - Conclusiveness Of The Indictment Apr 1932

Criminal Law - Federal Removal Proceedings - Conclusiveness Of The Indictment

Michigan Law Review

A vexatious question, and one which frequently arises in proceedings for removal from one federal district to another for trial, is to what extent the courts will go in weighing the force of the evidence against the accused. The government, when asking removal, presents to the court or commissioner a copy of the indictment found in the district to which removal is asked, and frequently rests on this, after giving evidence that the defendant is the party named in the indictment. The defendant, on the other hand, usually presents a mass of evidence, relevant and irrelevant, in an endeavor to …

Go to article

English Criminal Prosecutions, John B. Waite Apr 1932

English Criminal Prosecutions, John B. Waite

Michigan Law Review

A review of CRIMINAL JUSTICE IN ENGLAND, A STUDY IN LAW ADMINISTRATION. By Pendleton Howard.

Go to article

Crimes - Procedure - Limitation Of Actions - Extension Of Statutory Period Mar 1932

Crimes - Procedure - Limitation Of Actions - Extension Of Statutory Period

Michigan Law Review

The defendant was indicted in September, 1930, for having robbed a bank in August, 1927. At the time of his act, the statute of limitation of actions required that prosecutions for certain offenses be commenced within five years after the act, and included in this group the crime termed "robbery." Prosecutions for other offenses were barred after two years. In May, 1929, a new statute provided that prosecutions for felonies be commenced within five years after commission of the act by the accused. The defendant contended that robbing a bank was not within the scope of the term "robbery" as …

Go to article

Effect Of Amendment Extending Period Of Prosecution Of Criminal Actions, William L. Travis Jan 1932