People v. Nunley

Criminal Law—Validity of Preliminary Examination—Appointment of Shorthand Reporter—Qualifications.—It is not a tenable objection to the validity of a preliminary examination that the magistrate appointed a shorthand reporter to take the evidence who was not an official reporter, without hearing any evidence as to his qualifications, where the magistrate stated that he knew him to be competent;' nor that he was an employee of the district attorney, where it was not alleged that he was at all prejudiced or biased; nor that he was not sworn by the magistrate.

Id.—Time of Piling Certified Transcript.—The certified transcript was filed within the ten days prescribed by law, where the tenth day fell upon Sunday, and it was filed upon the following Monday.

Id.—Motion to Set Aside Information—Refusal of Reporter.—Upon a motion to set aside an information, the defendant cannot be prejudiced by a refusal of the court to appoint a shorthand reporter to take down the evidence, objections, and rulings.

Id.—Qualification of Juror—Actual Bias—-Impression from Public Rumor and Journals.—A challenge of a juror for actual bias was properly disallowed where the evidence was sufficient to warrant the court in finding that the “impression” of the juror was entirely founded upon public rumor and statements in public journals, and that he could and would act impartially and fairly upon the matters submitted to him.

Id.—Grand Larceny—Evidence—Reputation of Defendant—Rebuttal.—Where a defendant charged with grand larceny offered evidence to sustain- his general reputation for truth, honesty, and integrity in the city where he then lived, it was not error to allow the prosecution to show in rebuttal, by witnesses living near a place where he had recently lived in the same county, what was Ms general reputation in those respects.

Id.—Discretion—Sheriff Remaining in Courtroom.—The court did not abuse its discretion by allowing the sheriff, who was a witness for the prosecution, to remain in the courtroom during the trial.

Id.—Larceny of Horse—Evidence—Saddle—Coat.—Where the defendant was charged with the larceny of a horse, a witness was properly allowed to testify that the saddle found in the defendant’s possession resembled the one that was on the horse defendant was riding; and it was not prejudicial to allow the saddle so found, and the coat worn by the defendant when arrested, to be admitted in evidence.

Id.—Leading Questions.—The court has discretion to allow leading questions to be asked by the prosecution, against the objection of the defendant on that ground, if no abuse of discretion appears.

Id.—Instructions Properly Refused.—Instructions requested by the defendant which were substantially covered by the instructions given, or which were erroneous or inapplicable to the evidence, were properly refused.