State v. Bronzo

Nevada Supreme Court

State v. Bronzo

30 Nev. 311

CourtNevada Supreme Court

DecidedApril 15, 1908

DocketNo. 1730

StatusPublished

This text of 30 Nev. 311 (State v. Bronzo) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nevada Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Bronzo, 30 Nev. 311 (Neb. 1908).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court,

Sweeney, J. :

The defendant was indicted for the crime of murder, committed in the County of Eureka, and upon trial was found guilty of murder in the second degree; and sentenced by the Judge of the District Court of the Third Judicial District of Nevada, in and for Eureka County, to imprisonment in the State Penitentiary for thirty-five years. A motion in arrest of judgment and for a new trial were denied by the district court, and from such order the defendant appeals.

The only question presented upon this appeal is whether or not the grand jury which indicted defendant was legally impaneled. Counsel for the defendant challenged the panel of the grand jury upon several grounds. All that the record in this ease shows is that the motions made by the defendant in reference to the regularity of the grand jury which indicted the defendant were denied by the court. There is nothing in the record showing upon what the court acted, and, as all presumptions are in favor of the regularity of the proceedings of the trial court, we are bound to conclude that the [312]*312grounds of objection made by defendant’s counsel were not supported by the evidence and were devoid of merit. (State v. Wilson, 5 Nev. 43; State v. Wallin, 6 Nev. 280; State v. Bigg, 10 Nev. 288; State v. Ah Hung, 11 Nev. 428.)

The judgment and order of the trial court are affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

By the Court,

Sweeney, J. :

The defendant was indicted for the crime of murder, committed in the County of Eureka, and upon trial was found guilty of murder in the second degree; and sentenced by the Judge of the District Court of the Third Judicial District of Nevada, in and for Eureka County, to imprisonment in the State Penitentiary for thirty-five years. A motion in arrest of judgment and for a new trial were denied by the district court, and from such order the defendant appeals.

The only question presented upon this appeal is whether or not the grand jury which indicted defendant was legally impaneled. Counsel for the defendant challenged the panel of the grand jury upon several grounds. All that the record in this ease shows is that the motions made by the defendant in reference to the regularity of the grand jury which indicted the defendant were denied by the court. There is nothing in the record showing upon what the court acted, and, as all presumptions are in favor of the regularity of the proceedings of the trial court, we are bound to conclude that the [312]*312grounds of objection made by defendant’s counsel were not supported by the evidence and were devoid of merit. (State v. Wilson, 5 Nev. 43; State v. Wallin, 6 Nev. 280; State v. Bigg, 10 Nev. 288; State v. Ah Hung, 11 Nev. 428.)

The judgment and order of the trial court are affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 Nev. 311, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-bronzo-nev-1908.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack