State v. Lewis
Citations
- 31 Wash. 75
- 71 P. 778
- 1903 Wash. LEXIS 586
Syllabus
<p>JURORS-COMPETENCY-WAIVER OP OBJECTIONS.</p> <p>Under Bal. Code, § 4736, which provides that the verdict of a jury shall not be affected by reason of the incompetency of a juror, unless the juror was challenged for specific cause before verdict, a ground of objection to a juror will be deemed waived when the specific point was not urged as the basis of a challenge.</p> <p>SAME-JUSTICE OF PEACE AS JUROR-GROUND OF CHALLENGE.</p> <p>The provision of Bal. Code, § 473'6, that judicial officers shall not be compelled to serve as jurors is merely a privilege granted such officers, and is not a ground of challenge for cause.</p> <p>SAME.</p> <p>The fact that the prosecuting attorney is the legal adviser of justices of the peace, and that a juror may have had cases before him as justice in which the prosecuting attorney was engaged for the state, would be too remote to disqualify a justice of the peace from sitting as a juror in a criminal case, when no special personal relations are shown to exist between the juror and the prosecuting attorney.</p> <p>EMBEZZLEMENT-CLAIM OP LIEN FOR ATTORNEY’S PEES-GOOD FAITH -QUESTION FOR JURY.</p> <p>In a prosecution of an attorney for the embezzlement of funds belonging to a client, the court is warranted in submitting the cause to the jury, although there may be a civil action pending between the attorney and his client involving the right to such funds under a claim of lien, when there is evidence tending to show that the claim of lien was not asserted in good faith.</p> <p>SAME-EVIDENCE.</p> <p>Under an information charging the embezzlement of a specific sum of money, proof of the receipt and conversion of a part of the fund is sufficient to sustain a conviction.</p> <p>CRIMINAL LAW-INFORMATION-BILL OP PARTICUI.ARS.</p> <p>The denial of a bill of particulars upon a prosecution for larceny by embezzlement was not error, when the information showed that the defendant received certain property as an agent for another, which he fraudulen
Judges: Hadley
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
12 cases in this archive cite this case.
- State v. RadiMontana Supreme Court· 1978-04-18· cited 52×
- State v. AudiaWest Virginia Supreme Court· 1983-03-11· cited 40×
- Ottis v. Stevenson-Carson School District No. 303Court of Appeals of Washington· 1991-07-01· cited 33×
- Grove v. United StatesFourth Circuit· 1925-01-17· cited 29×
- State v. SpillmanWashington Supreme Court· 1920-04-06· cited 20×
- State v. JakubowskiWashington Supreme Court· 1913-12-26· cited 13×
- State v. DurbinWashington Supreme Court· 1903-07-20· cited 12×
- State v. DeloriaWashington Supreme Court· 1924-05-05· cited 10×
- State v. BogardusWashington Supreme Court· 1904-12-20· cited 9×
- State v. HatleyWest Virginia Supreme Court· 2009-03-17· cited 7×
- State v. WilliamsWashington Supreme Court· 1906-08-28· cited 6×
- Commonwealth v. YoungSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1955-01-14
Cites
3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.