Show SMITH TO STAND TRIAL Supreme Court Reverses How Howells Hows 1 ells ell s Decision in Taking Case From Jury 1 rOUSE CASE IS OVERRULED OVERRULE COURT LAYS DOWN RULE IN AP APPEALING APPEALING APPEALING PEALING CASES The 1111 he supreme court yesterday remanded ro a new trial the case of or Thomas ThomaS H ci sheriff of ot Cache county Involving barge harge of ot malfeasance In office The Thereal trial real court Judge Howell of Ogden pre preding preding ding ordered a verdict of or acquittal aft aCt f r th testimony had been heen taken on the that there was not sufficient J evl eI pio nf io o convict beyond beonda a reasonable rbt nt as the case shall shan be In criminal r supreme court holds that in office orrice Is not necessarily a crime 1 al c e I there is no provision for pun men hr by v imprisonment but only the theof aIt or of removal from office Conse the Hie proof necessary to convict t ol i tint not be so strong as Is necessary I 1 1 in criminal cases The supreme court held that the case should have gone to the Jury ju juThe The sheriff sheri was charged with six of tenses Collecting from Cache county a ator 2 for tor railroad and hack fare and board hoard of or self and prisoner In taking prisoner to the state prison after the state had al nl already already ready paid the amount 1395 1393 same fail fall failing failing lIng ing to report 12 fees tees collected In monthly month monthly ly I statement failing to report fees collected failing failing to report 6 ii fees col collected collected collected and falling failing to report SO fees collected The trial was only on the second fifth and sixth counts To use Case Overruled The rule of ot practice Is appealing cases to the supreme court is laid down more definitely defInite and the case of Mohr against the Consolidated Railway Pow Power er company com pan Is reversed re In its conclusions conclusIons conclusions the supreme court says All the orders rulings and decisions made by the trial court during the trial Including his ruling in directing or re refusing refusing refusing fusing to direct a verdict and all ques questions questions of fact in equity cases on which the trial court has passed including the find Ings and also all errors in findings of or tact fact and conclusions of or law made by the court in law cases are before this court for review without a n motion for a anew anew anew new trial The case so s far Car ar as itis It Itis ItIs is In conflict with these conclusions la Is |