v3243-229

Document Title Page

"to be reached. Thus, upon the whole case, the

court not only followed a practice condemned, but

by its added expression of an opinion doubtless

impressed the jurors with the belief that the

court meant that it was their duty to bring in

a verdict against the defendant. We are therefore

constrained to believe that the statements of the

court were prejudicial, and that the judgment

should be set aside and a new trial ordered."

The Q uong Duck case is not in point here.

Appellant also cited the case of Ah Fook Chang

  1. United States (CCA 9, 1937).

In this case it was submitted to the

jury at approximately 12 o'clock noon, and a little after

5 o'clock the jury still deliberating, the foreman came

to the chambers of the presiding judge and in the presence

of attorneys for both sides, the government's attorney

informed the judge that the Jury wished to be advised if

the confession of defendant in the case could be considered

as evidence as evidence against the other. Defense

attorney requested the court to inform the foreman that


archive.org Volume Name: govuscourtsca9briefs3243

Volume: http://archive.org/stream/govuscourtsca9briefs3243

Document Link: http://archive.org/stream/govuscourtsca9briefs3243#page/n228/mode/1up

Top Keywords (auto-generated):

foreman, wished, uong, thus, submitted, statements, sides, requested, reached, presiding, presence, prejudicial, practice, noon, meant

Top Key Phrases (auto-generated):

uong duck, practice condemned, fook chang, doubtless impressed, ah fook, added expression, 1937 .

Document Status: UGLY