47 La. Ann. 578 | La. | 1895
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Prom the sentence for murder defendant appeals, and relies onthemoiion to quash, assailing the constitutionality of Act No. 69 of 1890, organizing the courts, and on exceptions to the charge of the court. The first ground is disposed of by our decision in State vs. Harris, Ante, p. 386.
The charge of the court, the subject of the exceptions, is embraced in these propositions:
1. u There is very little question of manslaughter in this case, and none of justifiable homicide.”
2. “ The chief difficulty in this case will be whether the accused did the killing; you will have little difficulty with, anything else in the case.”
3. “ You may take the actions, conduct and words of the prisoner at the time (of the killing), or after, into consideration.”
It is true that in other portions of the charge the issues of fact were fairly submitted to the jury under the appropriate instructions as to the law. But the portions of this charge the subject of the exceptions, in our view, clearly trench upon the functions of the jury, and exceed the power of the court. Our law limits the judge
It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that the sentence of the lower court be reversed and set aside, and it is further adjudged and decreed that the case be remanded, and the defendant held for another trial in accordance with law.