State v. Accola
11 Iowa 246
Opinion
Defendant was convicted for violating section 2721 of the Code, and moved for a new trial, upon the ground that the jurors, as shown by the affidavit of two of them, had during their retirement read the notes of the testimony as taken by one of the attorneys on the trial.
Upon the authority of Abel v. Kennedy, 3 G. Greene 47; Shields v. Guffey 9 Iowa 322; Langworthy v. Myers, 4 Ib. 18; the motion was properly overruled. And see 1 Gra. & Wat. on New Trials 79, 80; 3 Ib. 1261.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
State v. Accola, 11 Iowa 246 (iowa 1860).
11 Iowa 246 (State v. Accola) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Carbon v. City of Ottumwa
64 N.W. 413 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1895)
Wright v. Illinois & Mississippi Telegraph Co.
20 Iowa 195 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1866)