| Show and Ajust CK f A be LC i Shot 07 i Supreme Court Affirms Ilia Sentence of 01 Judge Who Wb Tried lie lije Case Casc Will lI H be he Executed ad Unless IJ lie 1110 f fA for forA or orA A New Trial Now Tending Indig lJ Upon Affidavit of i AlaCe face is Gum G fed According to 10 the decision of ot sun sti court down tills this morn mornIng lug Ing I nil Robert hubert L 1 King ICing and Lynch o of ot the lie murder of ot Go fr y at rut the lie Sheep Bh II chit on 11 JI HWu will wilt have lum to pay Py tho death tom for their th lr crime Chief Justine Miner delivered tin the th opinion ion Jon of ot the lie court Justice l i And which tIme the judgment and of at tha tiso district court and tumid remands the its JIlt Rne with In lit ructions to execute thu tho r In Iii accordance with law Tho ease CUM has Inns attention has hu hint beun beell bitterly fought Its II The rite defend defendants flirts ants voie were adjudged guilty ot of the by J a Jury and 1111 who wino the lime case passed I the lie l of death upon them runt sentence will bo be e unless motion for a n trial now pending upon the nI of or John Johll Mace Mitre and others otherl Is Iii granted tire The on that motion motton will be bethe bethe the next step stein 1111 taken by b defendant nt itt On Ott It II was 1118 assigned tire tho court erred cried In allowing tho ito of or Paul on orr time tho preliminary heni hlll hearing Ing to be itt road read th the tha Jury jur nt itt II t thus the trial of or the tho cape COSS I It was contended by that ISIS revised rella ll statutes of or 1898 1598 I 9 which rIi iII allows fill iii 0 1111 1 t 1111 t 0 n 11 of If P wit l nestles ne 11 from tho 10 to be Ire read before the tire Jury jur re such aUch witness Wits WitH I I present II I In person at al the tire preliminary incoming hearing and the tie accused had till the privilege of ot lug him Is U unconstitutional In iii It ft violates see HOC ion 12 I article 1 I of or the Constitution II which provides that Itoh the tire accused small be confronted by tl the Ire he against t him hitri It Wire also ulso contended that no ito foundation was laid for tor the Introduction of the thio testimony of ot John Johnon ion on Tire Tho opinion pinion of lit the court on this IrIs point holds that tho time duct chief In requiring 18 lug ing that the be bo confronted by hy tho thin witnesses against him Is to de se secure I cure to defendant an opportunity for a und mith If It that opportunity bias hu bRen the test of oC confrontation Is IR accomplished Tho The taking faking of ot Johnsons testimony III in the tho presence of ot tho thu accused at nl tho tire pro pre preliminary hearing when ho had an all op 01 V i t tn to him satin stU nil fits n the constitutional requirement I provided time tho witness i Hunch annot with duo dUll l t ne be found within the state ut mit I Ithe the hr time limit nf lit the trial or t the case rite wont to how shw the Iho wit wll ne n could not br iii h found roun l In tilt the state 10 r amid ml hence iris hut wa was PIo llly t admItted by br b the tha trial court It Is II also contend that tire the 1 matlon doe noes riot not i that f tho tire WIH sr ns committed in 11 ru j nn stir to In I i n I tiny any j Olson rails rone burglary or robbery but I simply wilful in and prom dat d murder without telling sit ellin ting t nut that It time wiio committed In the p rp L Uon tion of u a robbery and that thul evidence t twan wan Val admitted l showing that tire the off n no 10 was wall committed c while to per j k n II robbery ry and amid the flit Ih of ut thu tint court upon this t was 48 pr en r ij Tine The court holds hOI s that th tire the attempt to t t PerPetrate lu robbery or any other felony t 1 I named In iii the during which a It j i Is committed takes the nine UlrIC v I i of or and to 10 0 the tIre legal of ot deliberation premeditation and do i sIgn which were otherwise e necessary I j attribute of ot murder In Iii the first r t do M t 1 I gioe groe Indictment In In the tho form used wits was nt under lie statute to charge murder Ier In Irs the first fiNI degree amid the lie Instructions In given Iven n to the tile Jury on onirIs this irIs subject were Appellant contends that the lest leaf t I shows that it 1 third party porty IUS t J ent nar In to the tue robb robbery ry bur titi VI I I that Is l not named or made madea madeSt I a St defendant In tire the Indictment and an that i defendants aro Improperly hold haiti responsible club sible for tOI hi III lila ruts acts l rt and that III th court Improperly Instructed tire the th Jury jur upon Ulon i tire tho liability of If if these defendants for tor tho tire acts ot of the third party Upon this Ihl matter mailer the opinion of ot th t court In Is that they were ere unlawfully as nil together In n a common design 10 commit a n felony Ion and therefore tire the I killing fit tor tho tim by lIy whomsoever Wr of the parties t present r It A as done was wag the lire OCt act of at null Cut hi uI nil it II if he I lots tors 11 ra timid the ot n ar a are ablo therewith whether they hov jr r the tha absent j third party fired Ored the Hal atal tal hot Tho The InstrUctions on this were Ire prop props properly h erly Itly given slen 1 i Tho Iho general Instructions of 0 tho the court Wets were wel examined nod It ID III I found that the tho th I exceptions taken takesi thereto thor to are not well wll l founded Anti And upon the he whole record r no at error was found hence the Judgment Is r rL L J |
