United States v. Gough
Utah Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of conviction and from an order theretofore made refusing a new trial of the district court of the first district. The opinion states the facts. In California, under similar code provision, oral charges without express consent of defendant is ground of reversal, as the statute requiring the' charge is mandatory.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of conviction and from an order theretofore made refusing a new trial of the district court of the first district. The opinion states the facts. In California, under similar code provision, oral charges without express consent of defendant is ground of reversal, as the statute requiring the' charge is mandatory. The People v. Beeler, 6 Cal. 246; People v. Payne, 8 Cal. 341; People v. Demont, 8 Cal. 423; People v. Ah Pong, 12 Cal. 346; People v. Woppner, 14 Cal. 437; People v. Antonio Chares, 26 Cal. 79; People v. Trim, 37 Cal. 274; People v. Sanford, 43 Cal. 29; People…
1Opinion of the Court
Zane, C. J.:
The defendant was accused of tbe crime of adultery, and a jury found him guilty. He appealed from tbe order of the court overruling bis motion for a new trial, and from tbe judgment on the verdict.
Tbe court gave an oral charge to the jury which was not taken down by a reporter, and this defendant assigns as error. The last clause of § 5033, Comp. Laws Utah, 1888, is as follows: “If the charge be not given in writing, it must be taken down by the phonographic reporter.” It appears from the record that the defendant and his counsel were present when the charge was given, and it does…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Alexander v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
3Cited by3 opinions
- People v. HartUtah Supreme Court · 1894
- People v. ScottUtah Supreme Court · 1894
- Farr v. SwigartUtah Supreme Court · 1896