94 Sickels 645People v. Cannon (1893)
<p>1. Criminal law—Stipulation.</p> <p>Where hoth parties to a criminal action have, through their respective counsel, stipulated in writing as to the existence of certain facts and have embodied such facts in a written statement which has been put in evidence, each party has the right to claim that the jury ought to be bound by those facts so far as they go, and the court is entirely justified in so instructing the jury.</p> <p>2. Same—Direction of conviction.</p> <p>In a criminal case, the court cannot legally direct a conviction, even though the evidence on the part of the people was neither contradicted nor explained.</p> <p>3. Same.</p> <p>But, where the substantial part of the facts is contained in an agreed statement thereof, and where the oral evidence is not contradicted or explained, and especially where the evidence of the defendant tends to corroborate the evidence of the people, the court has the right to tell the jury that if they believe the evidence, oral as well as written, they ought to convict, but that-they have the right to disbelieve the oral evidence although uncontradicted, and that as to the agreed statement of facts, they have no absolute right to disbelieve it, and, upon the whole ease, they must bring in a verdict of acquittal or conviction.</p> <p>4. Same.</p> <p>The court has the right to tell the jury, as matter of law, that the evidence on the part of the people, if believed, makes out the crime described in the indictment.</p>
