Blair v. Commonwealth
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 87 — INDICTMENT APPEAL FROM KENTON CRIMINAL COURT. 1. The verdict is not sustained by the evidence. 2. Where an amendment of a verdict is necessary it is proper for the jury to retire. (Proffatt on Jury Trial, secs. 450 to 463; Arch-bold’s Crim. Plead, and Prac.
Read the full summary
Case 87 — INDICTMENT APPEAL FROM KENTON CRIMINAL COURT. 1. The verdict is not sustained by the evidence. 2. Where an amendment of a verdict is necessary it is proper for the jury to retire. (Proffatt on Jury Trial, secs. 450 to 463; Arch-bold’s Crim. Plead, and Prac. (Waterman’s notes), vol. 1, pp. 601, 667.) 1. As the correction of the verdict was simplj' as to form it was not error for the court to make the correction in the presence of the jury- 2. This court will not disturb the verdict of a jury upon the ground that it is against the evidence, unless it is palpably so. (Bell v. Keach, 80…
1Opinion of the Court
CHIEF .JUSTICE HOLT
delivered the opinion of the court.
The indictment is for uttering a forged writing. The jury returned this verdict:
“We, the jury, find S. E. Blair guilty of forgery as per indictment, and fix punishment at three years in the penitentiary. Henry Kentrup, Foreman.”
Upon its being read the trial judge, in the presence of the jury, altered it by erasing the words “ of forgery as per indictment,” making it read: “We, the jury, find S. E. Blair guilty, and fix the punishment at three years in the penitentiary.” Upon its being read to the jury they said it was their verdict, and it…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Ray v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1929
- Commonwealth v. HustonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1911
- Jackson v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1946
- Phillips v. BurtonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1899