Legal Opinion

State v. Marston

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided May 31, 1909PublishedCited by 13 opinions

Information for an assault with intent to rape. Plea, not guilty. Trial by jury at the December Term, 1908, Addison County, Stanton, J.,-presiding. Verdict, guilty of a simple assault, and judgment thereon. The respondent excepted. The opinion states the case. The presumption of innocence in a criminal case is in the nature of evidence, to be weighed with any other evidence in the case making in favor of the respondent; and it was error to refuse so to instruct the jury.

Read the full summary

1Opinion of the CourtMunson, J.

When respondent’s counsel referred in his argument to the fact that the offence charged was punishable by imprisonment in the state prison, it was entirely proper for the court to say in its charge that the penalty might be the payment of a small fine, but that the matter was one with which the jury had nothing to do. If this discredited counsel with the jury to the prejudice of his client, as is suggested, the result is chargeable to the action of counsel and not to the comment of the court.

- The court stated the rule of reasonable doubt correctly,- and referred to the phrase itself as…

2Cases cited7 opinions

Langdon v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court · 1890
Bradish v. BlissSupreme Court of Vermont · 1862
In re Cowdry's WillSupreme Court of Vermont · 1905
State v. BeanSupreme Court of Vermont · 1905
Rogers v. SnowMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1875

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

State v. MinerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1969
State v. PercySupreme Court of Vermont · 1992
State v. WilsonWyoming Supreme Court · 1924
State v. HarringtonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1969
State v. AudetteSupreme Court of Vermont · 1970

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.