State v. Williams

Citations

• 18 Wash. 47
• 39 L.R.A. 821
• 50 P. 580
• 1897 Wash. LEXIS 103

Syllabus

<p>CRIMINAL LAW — CONSTITUTIONAL GUARANTEES — FAIR TRIAL — COMPELLING ACCUSED AND WITNESSES TO APPEAR IN MANACLES—RIGHT</p> <p>TO CONTINUANCE TO PROCURE WITNESSES—EXCUSABLE DELAY IN FILING BRIEFS.</p> <p>Failure of appellant in a criminal case to file his brief within the required time is excusable, when the counsel who appeared for him had removed from the state, and appellant, who was confined in jail, procured the brief to be filed as soon as he learned of the omission.</p> <p>Under art. 1, §22 of the constitution, guaranteeing to persons prosecuted for crime the right to have compulsory process to compel the attendance of witnesses in their behalf, it is error for the- court to refuse to grant a continuance to procure the presence in person of a material witness for defendant, when proper application has been made therefor.</p> <p>Under art. 1, § 22 of the constitution, declaring that, “ in criminal prosecutions the accused shall have the right to appear and defend in person,” and under the common law of England, adopted into our code so far as applicable, it is error to keep the accused in manacles during the progress of the trial and in the presence of the jury, unless it plainly appears that the prisoner is such a dangerous character as to warrant such precaution.</p> <p>It is error, likewise, to require a witness for accused to appear in court fettered and manacled to another person, although ■he' had been charged with the crime jointly with the accused and had been found guilty upon a prior and separate trial.</p>