People v. Ah Too
Idaho Supreme Court
APPEAL from District Court, Ada County. The rule is, upon a motion for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence, if it is probable that the verdict would be changed, or if it is doubtful how it would affect the verdict, the motion should be granted. (Jones v. Hartley, 3 Whart. 189; Windham, Go.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from District Court, Ada County. The rule is, upon a motion for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence, if it is probable that the verdict would be changed, or if it is doubtful how it would affect the verdict, the motion should be granted. (Jones v. Hartley, 3 Whart. 189; Windham, Go. Bank v. Kendall, 7 E. I. 77; Flanna-gan v. Newherg, 1 Idaho, 78'; 3 Graham & Waterman on New Trials, 1044; State v. Logan, 1 Nev. 509.) In capital cases, when upon a review of the whole testimony the court is not satisfied with the verdict, a new trial will be granted. (9 United States…
1Opinion of the CourtBuck, J.
Ah Too was indicted, tried, convicted, and sentenced at the November term of the district court, 1882, in Ada county, on an indictment for murder in the killing of Ah You. This appeal is taken from the judgment and from the ordér of *46the court overruling the motion for a new trial. The errors assigned in the bill of exceptions, and insisted upon in the argument on appeal are: 1. The refusal of the court to give a certain instruction at request of the defendant; and 2. The order of the court overruling the motion for a new trial. The instruction asked by defendant and refused by the court is as…
2Cited by7 opinions
- State v. HallIdaho Supreme Court · 1913
- State v. McMahanIdaho Supreme Court · 1937
- State v. UphamIdaho Supreme Court · 1932
- (PC) Beavers v. HoseyDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2023
- In Re: DeMores Montana LLC for Exoneration from Liability as Owners of M/V MTI HINVIV42060A919, and M/V MTI HINVIV42060A919District Court, D. Arizona · 2023
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.