Jones v. Commonwealth

Citations

• 31 Va. 830

Syllabus

<p>1. J was indicted for the malicious stabbing, &c., of W, with intent to maim, &e. The jury found J “guilty of unlawful cutting, as charged in the within indictment,” &e. The language, “as charged in the within indictment,” has reference both to the cutting and the intent, and is a sufficient finding of . the intent with which the unlawful act was done, to meet the requirement of the statute.</p> <p>2. The statute having dispensed with the necessity of keeping the jury together in prosecutions where the penalty cannot be death or confinement in the penitentiary for .ten years, if the jury, in a prosecution for malicious stabbing, &c., with intent to kill, &c., find the prisoner guilty of unlawful cutting with intent, &c. Upon a motion to set aside the verdict and grant a new trial on the ground of the separation of the jury before the verdict wras rendered, the court is not bound to set aside . the verdict for that cause, if it approved the verdict, and is satisfied it was fairljf and honestly rendered, and that neither the commonwealth nor the prisoner had been damnified by the separation.</p> <p>3. Upon a motion to set aside the verdict on the ground of the separation of the jury, the prisoner must prove the separation by affidavits or proof in court, and the offer to prove, which the court refuses, under tiie circumstances, to hear, is not sufficient to enable the appellate court to act on the question. The exception should show the proof.</p>