v3243-231

a confession in the case was only evidence against the

party making it, notwithstanding that a codefendant was

present when the confession was being made; but the

judge, over defendant's exception, adhered to the

instruction given the jury in the course of the trial,

viz., that a confession made by one defendant in this

case could be considered by the jury as evidence against

the other; that thereupon the foreman retired and a few

moments later the jury returned to the courtroom with

a verdict against both defendants; that neither clerk

nor court reporter was present during said proceedings

in chambers.

At page 809 of the opinion, the court

said:

"We believe the action of the trial

court was reversible error on two grounds. The

first is that appellants were entitled to be per-

sonally present at every stage of the trial.

(Citing cases) . They could have waived that

---

archive.org Volume Name: govuscourtsca9briefs3243

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

Document Link: http://archive.org/stream/govuscourtsca9briefs3243#page/n230/mode/1up

Top Keywords (auto-generated):

confession, waived, viz, thereupon, stage, sonally, reversible, returned, retired, reporter, notwithstanding, neither, moments, later, instruction

Top Key Phrases (auto-generated):

moments later, foreman retired, few moments, exception adhered

Document Status: UGLY