State v. Cazeau

Citations

• 8 La. Ann. 109

Syllabus

<p>There is no objection to the insertion of several offences of the same nature in an indictment in separate counts, though differing from each other in degree and punishment, wjien these offences arc all felonies.</p> <p>The right to compel the prosecutor to elect on which charge he will proceed, is confined to cases where the indictment coutains charges which are actually distinct, and which grow out of different transactions.</p> <p>The term felony means a crime of great magnitude, and subject to an infamous punishment—death, or imprisonment at hard labor.</p> <p>In an indictment against several, where the offence is such that it may have been committed by several—they are not of right entitled to be tried separately—but are to be tried in that manner only when the Court on sufficient cause, may think proper.</p> <p>The Supreme Court cannot review, in criminal cases, the acts of a Judge of the first instance, resting in his discretion.</p> <p>In an indictment against several, each defendant is entitled to his peremptory challenge. This is not a right to select, but a right to reject—and no one defendant can complain that jurors not challenged by him, have been challenged by a co-defendant.</p> <p>The improper reception of parol evidence offered by the State, of the contents of a policy of insurance, is cured by the subsequent introduction of the policy by the defendant.</p> <p>It is a general rule that whenever the credit of a witness is to be impeached by proof of anything that he has said, declared, or done in relation to the cause, he is first to be asked, upon cross-examination, whether he has said, declared, or done that which is intended to be proved, in order that he may have an opportunity of explaining that which is prima facie contradictory.</p> <p>The title of an Act cannot control the plain meaning of the words in the body of the Statute.</p>