Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

43 La. Ann. 400

State v. Ware

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Decided March 15, 1891

Supreme Court of Louisiana · decided 1891-03-15

<p>The Supreme Court has no authority to consider the evidence adduced helow, on the trial, tending to establish the guilt or innocence of the defendant. It has power only to determine whether or not the procedings wore regularly brought and conducted.</p> <p>The allowance of a motion for a new trial, based on a charged misapprehension and disregard of the facts by the jury, and on the discovery of material evidence since the trial, is within the discretion of the District Judge. ■</p> <p>This court is not concerned with the motion attacking a verdict, as contrary to the evidence; and will not interfere with the refusal of the judge to grant a new trial, on the ground of newly discovered material evidence, unless in extreme and clear cases, where injustice was done.</p> <p>The jury tries the prisoner on the charge against him, and this court trios the judge, on the rulings made by him and complained of, on questions of law only.</p>

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently February 1910

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1891-03-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1The opinion of the court was delivered by

Bermudez, O. J.

¶2The defendant was indicted for rape, convicted and sentenced to the extreme penalty.

¶3On appeal, he relies solely on a motion for a new trial, in which the jury is' charged with a misapprehension of the facts, and the judge, with error in disregarding the affidavit of newly discovered evidence since the trial, which if adduced, would influence the jury to a new finding.

¶4To the refusal of the judge to grant the new trial, a bill of exception was reserved.

¶5In an elaborate opinion, the District Judge has taken pains to show that the grounds relied on for a new trial are untenable.

¶6It has been repeatedly held that this court has no authority to consider the evidence adduced below, tending to establish the guilt or innocence of the defendant, and have power only to ascertain and determine, on proper showing, whether or not the proceedings were regularly instituted, carried on and consumniated.

¶7It will not interfere with the discretion of the District Judge exercised in refusing a new trial on the grounds of newly discovered material evidence since the trial, anless in extreme cases, in which otherwise injustice would be done. Those features are not presented in the present instance.

¶8*402The jury tries the accused on the charge against him, and this court tries the judge for his ruling but on questions of law only.

¶9Judgment affirmed.

/43/laann/400 · .json · Public domain