State v. Preuett

Supreme Court of Louisiana

State v. Preuett

77 So. 514, 142 La. 720, 1918 La. LEXIS 1425

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedJanuary 3, 1918

DocketNo. 22856

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 77 So. 514 (State v. Preuett) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Preuett, 77 So. 514, 142 La. 720, 1918 La. LEXIS 1425 (La. 1918).

Pincite

Opinion

MONROE, O. J.

Defendants, having been convicted of willfully shooting at two persons named in the indictment, and sentenced to imprisonment at hard labor, appeal to' this court, but have made no appearance here, either in person or by counsel.

[1] It appears from the transcript that they moved for a continuance, but reserved no bill of exception to the overruling of their motion, the correctness of which cannot, therefore, be.inquired into. Marr’s Or. Jur. of La. p. 598.

[2] Having been convicted, they moved for a new trial, upon the ground that they had thereafter discovered a witness who- would testify that one of the persons whom they had been convicted of shooting at had stated, shortly after the time of the alleged shooting, “that he did not know who shot at them, and would not testify as to who the parties were.”

It is not alleged that the person said to have been discovered did not testify in the case, but, even had it been, it would not have furnished sufficient ground to require the granting of a new trial.

“The intention to impeach the testimony of witnesses as given at the trial is not a legal ground for a new trial.” State v. Gauthreaux et al., 38 La. Ann. 611; State v. Young, 107 La. 620, 31 South. 993.

Judgment affirmed.

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