TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

People v. Ekola

People v. Ekola, 135 N.W. 914 (Mich. 1912)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Michigan Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
May 3, 1912
Docket
No. 124
Judges
Bird, Blair, Brooke, McAlvay, Moore, Ostrander, Steers, Stone
Citations
135 N.W. 914170 Mich. 1581912 Mich. LEXIS 806
Disposition
Affirmed.
Headnotes
Criminal Law — Appeal and Error — Record. Upon a record which fails to show that respondent filed a motion for a new trial, or that the court was asked to give reasons for his decision thereon, and which omits the charge of the court, respondent may not review, on writ of error, the • weight of the evidence or alleged errors in charging the jury.
Summary
Exceptions before sentence from Marquette; Elannigan, J. Gust Ekola was convicted of being accessory to the indecent exposure of the person of a patron of respondent’s saloon.

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

Opinion of the Court — Moore

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

Moore, C. J.

The respondent was convicted of lewd . and lascivious behavior, and has brought the case here upon exceptions before sentence.

*159 In his brief, counsel for respondent recite at considerable length the testimony for and against the respondent. He then proceeds to say that the court erred in refusing the respondent a new trial on the ground that the conviction was contrary to all the evidence in the case. The record nowhere shows the motion which was made for a new trial, nor does it show that the court was requested to file any reasons for overruling the motion if he did so, or that the judge filed any reasons for so doing. Counsel also quote a portion of the charge of the court and say:

“ It should have been explained by the judge what preponderance of evidence means.”

The record does not show the charge of the court, nor does it show whether the attention of the court was called to the present claim of counsel. This being the situation, we cannot say that any error was committed.

The action of the court below is affirmed, and the case remanded.

Steers,. McAlvay, Brooke, Blair, Stone, and Ostrander, JJ., concurred. Bird, J., did not sit.

How later courts describe this case

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

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

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