State v. Moore

Citations

• 119 La. 564
• 44 So. 299
• 1907 La. LEXIS 527

Syllabus

<p>1. Criminal Law — View By Jury — Waiver oe Objections — Did Not Accompany the Jury.</p> <p>It would be better and safer if the trial judge were to accompany the jury. His failure to accompany the jurors, not timely urged, affords no good ground to set aside the jury’s verdict.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. voi. 15, Criminal Law, § 2644; vol. 14, Criminal Law, § 1461.]</p> <p>2. Same — Not Misconduct.</p> <p>The jury while at the scene of the homicide were in charge of two deputies, within whose sight they were all the time they were in the house. They did not talk to any one other than members of the jury.</p> <p>[Ed/Note. — For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 14, Criminal Law, § 1519.]</p> <p>3. Same — Presence oe the Accused.</p> <p>The accused, in charge of the sheriff, followed the jury to the house where it was stated the killing took .place. He, in charge of the officer, remained outside. He did not ask to go into the house, and urged no objection.</p> <p>The jury was inside the house about five minutes.</p> <p>The case went to the jury. After their verdict, on application for new trial, was the time that objection was urged. It was not timely urged.</p> <p>4. Homicide — Charge.</p> <p>Taken as a whole, the charge complied with the law. The principle of self-defense was sufficiently given to the jury.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>