State v. Accola

Supreme Court of Iowa

State v. Accola

11 Iowa 246

CourtSupreme Court of Iowa

DecidedDecember 5, 1860

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 11 Iowa 246 (State v. Accola) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Iowa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Accola, 11 Iowa 246 (iowa 1860).

Pincite

Opinion

Wright, J.

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

Wright, J.

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 Iowa 246, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-accola-iowa-1860.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack