OCR Text |
Show COW REVERSES TIEJEIlfiS Instructions to Jury in Shooting Case Held Erroneous Er-roneous by Justices. Of four decisions rendered by the supreme su-preme court yesterday, reversals were ordered or-dered In three cai-es, one of Tvhich is that of t'c-nnis T. Terrell, who is under an Indeterminate In-determinate sentence from t-alt Lake county on a charge of assault v. ith a deadly weapon Tith intent to do bodily harn,. Terrell, on tho night of May ;7. 1?1S. shot at an Intruder v ho, he said he thought, vras trying to rob hi rabbi t pent;. The intrude;' was Ray Co'.van, n VLdri'. of ae. who, at the trial, said he had opfP.fi the -joor of the rabbit pens merely io pjt tiif rabbity, thuiirn evidence evi-dence wh y produced to ; lion- that previously pre-viously he had acknowledged intent to steal thetn. The tiue.tiun before the lower low-er court way largely wlu.-ther Terrell w:is jtiftifii'd under tho circumstances in sh'joun;?. , 'J'iio I'ate wciit to the supreme court on ta qiit'Stiou of the instructions to the jury in the eae. The majority of the higher tribunal held that the instructions were so erroneous as to be ruversible error. Tho opinion was written by Chief Justice b Corf ma n, who entered into the question of ulioti shouting in defense or" property is justifiable. Justices VaicnUne Gideon and S. H. Thurman concurred. Justice J. h VYit-k held that the instruct Ions were so incompleie as to be misleading, but eon-side eon-side red licit even on his own testimony Terrell was not Justified in ins actions. Justice A. J. Yeber was disqualified from sitting in the eae. Percy Groesbeck. 4 years o; age, who was injured iu a job press he was fi-ed-ing at the plant of the Lakeside Printing company, on an appeal from the lower company won on an 3ppea! .from the lower should find for the defendant. The boy was suing for personal da ma ires. The supreme court held that tho ease should have pone. o tiie jury, Failure of the court to give an instrue-I instrue-I tion aked for by compel for John Ar'.v-: Ar'.v-: iiroi'ig. in his case against J;unes I.arsen. can st' d the tuprenv- court to send that case la-":k for :i m-w trial. The suit was one fur all-ged breach o: contract, Lrr-sen Lrr-sen va-; under wfltir-n .-ontr:i.;t to eV-.i'. eV-.i'. er '.'v,e ia'r.ni: :o Ar:iisiroig at Ijphrain.. f-. n J a u i i e r e 1 only oil. T he e r d i c t o f the jury in the lower cojrt was "no cause of actio:;." T:;e suprem.e court te::t it . ba.ck f'ir 9. new trial. Jamef? C ot t-ini oh in incd a ve.'-i lot of i s .'. i against ihe OiT-gou Short Line rail-! rail-! road eon.pan.v for damages done to his :; Lilcmvbiie a; a defective cressing a' Tr;2 ;:;n '.t ' . The n utomol'he s' ailed Son th- tra'h'a-d j s-.'.uch;;.g freight ei e ran i:iu it. T' c railroad r.pptaled. bjt the cpreme court lo-jnd r.o rc er-bj error. |