TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Graybeal v. State

Graybeal v. State, 44 N.E. 641 (Ind. 1896)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Indiana Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
September 24, 1896
Docket
No. 17,703
Judges
Monks
Citations
44 N.E. 641145 Ind. 6231896 Ind. LEXIS 106
Disposition
Affirmed.
Headnotes
Appellate Procedure. — Bill of Exceptions. — Criminal Law. — Affidavits to sustain causes assigned for a new trial in a criminal case, can only be brought into the record by embodying them in a bill of exceptions. Same. — Affidavits for New Trial. — When Made Part of Record by Order of Court. — Statute Construed. — Section 662 Burns’ R. S-1894 (section 650 R. S. 1881), which provides that affidavits may be made a part of the record by order of court, relates exclusively to civil actions, and has no application to criminal cases.
Summary
From the LaPorte Circuit Court.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Monks

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Monks, C. J.

— Appellant was tried upon an indictment charging him with murder in the first degree, and found guilty of manslaughter, and over a motion for a new trial judgment was rendered upon the verdict.

The only error assigned is that the court erred in overruling the motion for a new trial.

The only cause assigned for a new trial was alleged misconduct of the jury. The affidavit filed in support of the motion for a new trial is not made a part of the record by a bill of exceptions.

Affidavits to sustain causes assigned for a new trial in a criminal case can only be brought into the record by embodying them in a bill of exceptions. Naanes v. State, 143 Ind. 299 ; Townsend v. State, 132 Ind. 315 ; Meredith v. State, 122 Ind. 514 ; Leverich v. State, 105 Ind. 277 ; Gillett’s Crim. Law, section 990, and cases cited.

*624 Section 662, R. S. 1894 (section 650, R. S. 1881), which provides that affidavits may be made a part of the record by order of court, relates exclusively to civil actions, and has no application to criminal cases. Naanes v. State, supra.

There is nothing in the record to sustain the assignment of error.

The judgment is therefore affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1898: 21900: 31901: 11928: 118982026peak 1900 · 3

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Siple v. State57 N.E. 544 (Ind. 1900)
  2. Alexander v. State164 N.E. 259 (Ind. 1928)
  3. Lane v. State51 N.E. 1056 (Ind. 1898)
  4. Crawford v. State57 N.E. 931 (Ind. 1900)
  5. Williams v. State60 N.E. 942 (Ind. 1901)
  6. Names v. State50 N.E. 401 (Ind. Ct. App. 1898)

Most recent

  1. Alexander v. State164 N.E. 259 (Ind. 1928)
  2. Williams v. State60 N.E. 942 (Ind. 1901)
  3. Crawford v. State57 N.E. 931 (Ind. 1900)
  4. Siple v. State57 N.E. 544 (Ind. 1900)
  5. McCaffrey v. Bradford Milling Co.56 N.E. 679 (Ind. Ct. App. 1900)
  6. Lane v. State51 N.E. 1056 (Ind. 1898)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 4

DepthCaseCited by
Leverich v. State, 4 N.E. 852 (Ind. 1886) 33
Naanes v. State, 42 N.E. 609 (Ind. 1896) 15
Meredith v. State, 24 N.E. 161 (Ind. 1890) 12
Townsend v. State, 31 N.E. 797 (Ind. 1892) 6

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list