People v. Eamaus

Respondent was convicted of keeping and maintaining a house of ill-fame in the city of Kalamazoo. Though impleaded with another, his wife, he demanded and received a separate trial. He now reviews his conviction under exceptions before sentence. His counsel relies for reversal upon the following points:(1) Error in denying motion for continuance.(2) Errors in the admission and rejection of testimony.(3) Error in the charge of the court.

1. It appears from the record that respondent was arraigned, waived examination, and the return was filed on June 4, 1918. On June 6 the information was filed.…