| Show J t il ANNA MAimS CASE t i An Eureka Shooting Scrape Argied Before the Supreme Court II 1 < I 1 I i JOHN LU TAYLOR CREATES A SCENE I i r In fude u rj I Co and NMI I Cm I rj T 31rq JilroVoth 00101 aoah II r I trCuurt iilllne > I jlm The Supreme court heard arguments it It today In the case of the State of Utah respondent and plaintiff v s Anna 1i t 1 iej I Marks appellant and defendant Mrs Harks war convicted I last I June of tho crime of UFMiull with Intent to murder Patrick Shea was lined < the sum It i of JOIW and ordered to stand convicted until the line was paid j a1 Arcoidlng t I lo tie abstract of the case It copper is that Bhea and Ml Marks who are both residents I of Eureka fl Juab county got Into n dispute I last 1 Allay ns to the right of pemwulon to t1 Part I of a lol I I bhea < appealed with u it t t number or nun upon the disputed I lot utlh In posts 11 Ji cue day and began putting irtpatory to erecting u feme Th lot adjoined tile residence of Mrs Marks who as fast as chit Cne ui put I up pixctidea to demolish la knock I Ink off the boards Vnin Ulna and IiI otr1n I jj i > H men had got to within I 1 i il nlmut llflicn or twenty ieet of defendant Land weie stout lu put II i in a post Airs Marks I stood over them I Ulth It revolver threatening them 1 llh dlh If they put II In and at the Paris time ornialmandling all I is Stand bacl II The men got 1 l1redtrourbtlimsem Marlim it Ill I alleged to hue tired four time nearly t I near-ly hitting Shen < who luckily was pro r tectcd ly a post f Is f The defendant claimed that shf wan threalemd by shea and l his men and I that idle fired the ftcalu thero oft the property 4 There tire In nit eleven points cited and relied on for u reversal among 11 which are that the court erred In retim ing to allow counsel for Mrs Marks to fully ironsexamine Mini an to his I r vine trouble with Parties that the eoutl erred In hurKlne th e Jury that Mr Maks was bound to Produce evident evi-dent the allfiractlon of the jury that she was Justllled or excuseel 1 for the shooting nnd that tho court erred In charging the jury that to Justify the asgault charged In the Information there must be an Imperative necessity to i take lid After listening 10 arguments tile court took the case under n dIoment |
