Melton v. State

SAMFORD, Judge.

Defendant was tried on an indictment charging robbery and o-n his trial was found guilty of an assau.lt to rob.

Insistence is here made that defendant should have been granted a new trial for the reason that the jury was allowed to separate after the charge of the court had been given and before a verdict was rendered. The undisputed facts on this question disclose that at 6 o’clock p. m. the trial judge adjourned the court for supper, with the trial of defendant still pending; that the deputy sheriff started with the jury to give them supper, and when they had gone about one…