42 P. 511 | Idaho | 1895
(After Stating the Facts.) — Subdivision 5. of section 7855 of the Revised Statutes of Idaho, is as follows: “When the evidence is concluded, unless the case is submitted to the jury on either side or on both sides without argument* the district attorney or other counsel for the people, must open* and the district attorney may conclude the argument.” There is no indication, either in this subdivision or in any other part, of this section, that it was the intention of the legislature to compel the district attorney to close the argument of the ease in person, and therefore there can be no reason whatever to construe the word “may” in the last clause to mean “must.” In People v. Biles, 2 Idaho, 114, 6 Pac. 120, this court held that, authority is given in the statute for the employment of private counsel, who may properly assist the district attorney in the prosecution of criminal causes. It also holds that the district, attorney shall have the general management and control of all such cases: that is, he is entitled to have the direction and control of all those matters which properly pertain to the position of the leading attorney in a causé, among which are arranging- and putting in the testimony, and arranging the order of the-argument, subject, of course, at all times, to the statutory provisions, and the reasonable rules and regulations of the court,, and the directions and control of the judge thereof. But there-is no statute requiring the district attorney to close the argument of a criminal cause in person, when he'may as well or-better do so by the assistant counsel. The claim that assistant counsel, not having taken the same oath as the district attorney* may go out of his way, or out of the record, to attack the defendant or his witnesses, has no force whatever. The court has-