State v. Atkinson

Citations

• 33 S.C. 100
• 11 S.E. 693
• 1890 S.C. LEXIS 123

Syllabus

<p>1. A motion for continuance is addressed to the discretion of the Circuit Judge, and his refusal is not error reviewable on appeal.</p> <p>2. Error cannot he imputed to the trial judge for refusing to quash an indictment containing two counts charging two distinct offences, when the “Case” does not show that any motion to quash was ever made, nor where a nolle prosequi had been entered as to one count before trial had.</p> <p>3. Under an indictment against a physician for prescribing liquor to one upon whom he was not in actual attendance, in violation of law, evidence of the number of prescriptions issued by defendant within a specified time, to be filled at the same drug store, is relevant to the issue of defendant s good faith in issuing the prescription in this case.</p> <p>4. The conduct of the trial judge in taking away from the prosecuting attorney the cross-examination of defendant’s witnesses, may be unusual and not to be commended, but it is not error of law reviéwable ' on appeal.</p> <p>5. The mode of conducting a trial must necessarily be left largely to the discretion of the Circuit Judge, and no abuse of that discretion is to be found in telling a witness that “I don’t remember” is not a sufficient answer.</p> <p>6'. An inquiry addressed by the judge to a witness, and his reply thereto, upon a matter not pertinent or relevant to the case under consideration, furnishes no ground for a new trial.</p> <p>7. A statement of the particular issues of fact which the jury should pass upon, and of the testimony throwing light upon such issues, is not a charge on the facts.</p> <p>8. This court cannot be expected to review any action of the Circuit Court, when the “Case” fails to show what such action was.</p> <p>9. A failure to grant a new trial on affidavits alleging misconduct in the jury room, counter-affidavits being submitted, sustained.</p> <p>10. Where it does not appear in the “Case” that any requests to charge were submitted or refused, this court i