Falk v. People

Citations

• 42 Ill. 331

Syllabus

<p>1. Verdict against the evidence — when set aside. The rule that an appellate court will not interfere to set aside a verdict, unless it is palpably against the evidence, obtains in the largest sense in civil cases, but it is not applied to the same extent in criminal cases, especially where life is at stake.</p> <p>2. Hence, in a capital case, when this court, on considering the whole record, shall be satisfied justice has not been done, the case will be sent to another jury; and it need not appear that the first jury acted rashly, by deciding against the evidence.</p> <p>3. The jury—their responsibility in ariminal cases. While it is true in the fullest sense, that a jury in a criminal case are judges both of the fact and of the law, and may be so instructed by the court, they should then be left to their own responsibility alone, to decide on the guilt or innocence of the prisoner, giving to him the benefit of all reasonable doubts, without any reference to the possible future action of the court.</p> <p>4. Hence, an instruction which correctly states the right of the jury to judge of the law and the fact, and then concludes with the statement, that, “ if they disregard the instructions of the court, and mistake the law to the prejudice of the prisoner, it would be the duty of the court to set aside the verdict,” is erroneous.</p> <p>5. The right of the jury to disregard the instructions of the court, as stated in Schnier v. The People, 23 Ill. 17, is again affirmed as the law, and in the language of that case.</p> <p>6. Exceptions—whether essential in a capital case. In a capital case, where the instructions given by the court below do not announce correct legal principles, or, being correct, are inapplicable to the case, though no exceptions are taken to them, the appellate court, in the face of the record, will not pronounce sentence of death upon the prisoner, but will award a new trial.</p>