57 So. 270 | La. | 1912
Defendants prosecute this appeal from a conviction and sentence for stealing a calf. The only bill of exception that we find in the record was taken to the overruling of a motion for new trial. It is therein alleged:
(1) That defendants were convicted on circumstantial and hearsay evidence; and (2) that they had discovered new and material evidence after the trial.
The trial judge, in signing the bill, gives the following reasons for overruling the motion, to wit;
“The evidence in said case was conclusive as to the guilt of said defendants, and was positive, although some hearsay evidence went to the jury, without any objection on the part of the attorney of said defendants; but the evidence was ample for conviction, and which was positive and direct evidence. As to the question of newly discovered evidence, to prove that the said calf was seen after said parties were charged with the stealing, that point was brought out before the jury, and evidence of' one of the witnesses named in the motion was admitted by the district attorney, on a motion for continuance, said witness being one Lejeune, the same person, and was also proven by another witness at said trial.”
Judgment affirmed.