Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

32 La. Ann. 103

State v. Chenier

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Decided January 15, 1880

Supreme Court of Louisiana · decided 1880-01-15

Martin. Fonte-lieu, J. No brief filed on behalf of the State. Jas. E. Mouton, for defendant, contended : That an arraignment of the accused before the trial had begun was necessary. He cited in his support State vs. Epps, 27 A. 227 ; State vs. Ford, 30 A. 311; State vs. Christian, 30 A. 367.

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“We cannot sanction such a departure from ancient landmarks in criminal procedure. The prisoner must be arraigned and must, plead to the indictment before the case can be set down for trial or tried. It may be that, in this particular case, no prejudice”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Crain v. United States

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1880-01-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 1910

3 state decisions

301880189019001910decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1The opinion of the court was delivered by

Spencer, J.

¶2The defendant having been indicted for rape, was convicted without capital punishment, and sentenced to hard labor for life. He appeals, and relies upon several bills of exception as grounds for reversal. It will only be necessary to notice one of them. •

¶3The case having been called for trial by the State, a jury having been empaneled and sworn, and the trial proceeded with, the attorney for the State, suggesting that the defendant had not been arraigned and had entered no plea, moved that he be arraigned and that he be required to plead. The accused objected that the arraignment and plea must precede the trial, and that the jury drawn was incompetent to try the cause. The court overruled the objection, caused the prisoner to be arraigned and his plea made, and directed the trial to proceed.

¶4*104We cannot sanction such a departure from ancient landmarks in criminal procedure. The prisoner must be arraigned, and must plead to the indictment before the case can be set down for trial or tried.

¶5It may be that in this particular ease no prejudice was wrought to the accused. Still we think it unsafe to sanction such irregularities in capital cases.

¶6The verdict and sentence are set aside, and this cause is remanded for a new trial according to law.

/32/laann/103 · .json · Public domain