Summary
The Indiana Supreme Court affirmed a conviction for running a gaming house. The court held that the record did not properly present the juror voir dire or trial evidence because no bill of exceptions was timely incorporated into the record, and no time beyond the term had been granted for filing it.
Holdings
- When the record does not show that time beyond the term was granted to file a bill of exceptions, the bill is not part of the record, even if the bill recites that it was presented within the time allowed.
- The alleged errors could not be reviewed because the record contained neither the challenged voir dire proceedings nor the trial evidence; consequently, no error was presented.
Questions Presented
- Whether the appellate court could consider a bill of exceptions containing the evidence when the record did not show that the trial court granted time beyond the term to file it.
- Whether the alleged errors concerning a juror challenge and questions to witnesses could be reviewed when the voir dire and trial evidence were not included in the record.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (7)
- Bray v. McLaughlin, 191 Ind. 190, 131 N.E. 518 (1921)(followed)
- Hancher v. Stephenson, 147 Ind. 498, 500, 46 N.E. 916 (1897)(followed)
- Utterback v. State, 153 Ind. 545, 549, 50 N.E. 420 (1899)(followed)
- Carskaddon v. Pine, 154 Ind. 410, 412, 56 N.E. 844 (1900)(followed)
- Taylor v. Canaday, Rec., 155 Ind. 671, 677, 57 N.E. 524, 59 N.E. 20 (1900)(followed)
- Malott v. Central Trust Co.; Admr., 168 Ind. 428, 431, 74 N.E. 369, 11 Ann. Cas. 604 (1906)(followed)
- Bass v. State, 188 Ind. 21, 24, 120 N.E. 657 (1918)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…