| OCR Text |
Show BOND SURETY MUST BE INCREASED ON FRIDAY Judge Martin M. Larson Denies Motion for New Trial; Supreme Court Plea Is Final Defense Effort His motion for a new trial denied, Loyal Christensen, recently convicted of a statutory charge, Wednesday was sentenced to serve not less than five years in the state penitentiary peni-tentiary for the crime. Sentence was passed by Judge Martin M. Larson of the Fourth district court. A crowded courtroom heard sentence passed upon Christensen, completing Utah county's part in the notorious case, in which a jury recently convicted Christensen Chris-tensen of the crime, as charged by Mrs. Reva Stevens Daniels, Provo woman. Notice of Appeal Filed Attorney Vere L. McCarthy of Salt Lake, who is now in charge of Christensen's defense, filed notice of appeal to the Utah supreme court. Pending the decision of this body, Christensen will be out on bond, it is assumed. JI. B. Pope, prosecuting attorney, declared that he would not ask for an increase in the present $5,000 bond, but asked that the surety on this bond be increased, and upon the request re-quest of his attorney, Christensen was given until Friday norning at 10 o'clock to furnish such surety. He was originally bonded by William Cayias, professional bondsman of Salt Lake City, who was said to be ill Wednesday Wednes-day morning, and unable to appear at the courtroom. If this surety is furnished satisfactorily, as expected, Christensen will be at liberty under bond until the supreme court passes upon Judge Larson's decision. The case has attracted widespread interest throughout Utah, particularly in Utah county, where the crime was alleged al-leged to have been committed. Affidavits AreTteviewed " " After arguments by Attorney J. W. Robinson and M. h. Fope of the prosecution, and Attorney Vere L. McCarthy for the defense, regarding Christensen's motion for a new trial, Judge Larson reviewed the affidavits and denied the motion, declaring that the evidence of the affidavits was insufficient for such action. In discussing the affidavits presented by the defense,: asking for a new trial, Judge Larson laid particular stress upon one signed by Fay Snyder of Payson R L. Mitchell and Mrs. Goldie Heard of Salt Lake City. This alleged that Wil-ford Wil-ford Gray of Provo, one of the jurors., was heard to say that he would convict Christensen whether he was guilty or not. This Judge Larson declared, was the most weighty of the affidavits presented, but since it did not indicate before whom or where the alleged statement was made, and since Gray himself denied the charge completely in a counter-atti-davit, it was not of sufficient strength to call for a new trial. Seven statutory grounds for a new trial were included m the motion filed by the defense, including charges of intimidation intim-idation of the jury, improper selection, and improper actions after selection. Jury Chosen Without Difficulty ' Judge Larson disposed of the claim of improper se ec-tion ec-tion by stating that the jury was chosen without difficulty,, and that the defense did not use up all its preemptory challenges, chal-lenges, when the jury was chosen. . . In regard to alleged intimidation, Judge Larson stated that Attorneys Morgan and Turner did not know of any such activity at the time of the trial, or they would have called it to the court's attention then. Regarding the claim of new evidence, asserting that a "Charles T. Cook" could testify as to Christensen s inn" cence of the charge, but could, not now be "ached. Judge Larson stated that Cook was said to have attended the t nal, and to have been ready to testify at any time previously, so that this could not be called new evidence. , , Other alleged statements of jurors, stating Chi Jensen s , innocence were disregarded upon denials of the men concerned, con-cerned, and also because of a poll taken among the imois after the verdict had been announced, showing unanimous agreement as to Christensen's guilt, Judge Larson stated. Change of venue, another count upon ,wh ch the . motion for a new trial was made, was not regarded as sufficient grounds by Judge Larson, since a colleague had pieviously denied such a change. i |
