Bowers v. StateBowers v. State
- Reporters:
- , ,
- Before:
- Fish
1. Tliе court did not err in refusing to grant a new trial on tlie ground of tlie allegеd newly discovered еvidence; as it was merely cumulative and impeaching in charаcter; and besides, it .appears that both of the affiants to such evidence were subpoenaed as witnesses by the acсused before the triаl, and that upon the hеaring of the motion fоr a new trial the State submitted affidavits directly сontradicting those sеtting forth the alleged nеwly discovered evidence.
2. There was nо merit in the ground of the. mоtion for a new trial to the effect that the accused “was dеceived and entrаpped by the prinсipal witnesses” who testified for the State (naming them), in that, during the term of сourt at which the accused was tried and prior to his trial, such witnesses informed the accused that they knew nothing of- the homicide for which he was indicted and nothing as to any connеction he had with it. Especially was such ground not cause for a new trial when it does not appear that the court’s attention was in any way called ‘tо the fact that the accused had been so deceived and entrapped, until the motion for a new trial was presented.
3. The evidence authorized the verdict, and the court did not err in refusing to grant a new trial.
Judgment affirmed.
All the Justices concur.