State v. Cole
Supreme Court of Louisiana
APPEAL from the Ninth District Court, Parish of Tensas. Young, J. 1.Where witnesses are sequestered by order of court, and the order is disobeyed by one of the witnesses who had been warned by the sheriff not to come into court, and who was fully cognizant of the order, it is discretionary with the court a qua to exclude the disobedient witness’s testimony, particularly when it does not appear that his evidence was material to the prisoner’s defense. 36 Ann. 149; 34 Ann.…
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Ninth District Court, Parish of Tensas. Young, J. 1.Where witnesses are sequestered by order of court, and the order is disobeyed by one of the witnesses who had been warned by the sheriff not to come into court, and who was fully cognizant of the order, it is discretionary with the court a qua to exclude the disobedient witness’s testimony, particularly when it does not appear that his evidence was material to the prisoner’s defense. 36 Ann. 149; 34 Ann. 383; 15 Ann. 79; Arch- • bold’s Crim. Plead, and Ptac,, Pomeroy’s notes, Yol. 1, p. 539; Bishop Grim. Pro. Yol. 1, §§…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Poché,- J.
In support of their appeal from a sentence of six years to hard labor, under a conviction of robbery, the defendants, three in number, rely on six bills of exception.
1st. In a motion to quash the information, they denied the legal power or authority of the District Attorney, to proceed by information when the grand jury is actually in session, and they contend that under such circumstances an indictment would have been the exclusive mode of proceeding under the offense charged against them.
The argument is not sound; it is effectively answered…
2Cited by4 opinions
- State v. HighSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1908
- State v. MenardSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1903
- Yaffee v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1921
- State v. McLoftonSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1919