Ball

Ball v. United States

Good Law
147 F. 32·2 Alaska Fed. 536·78 C.C.A. 126·1906 U.S. App. LEXIS 4182
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 18, 1906No. 1,221California4,475 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Gilbert, J.

after stating the case as above, delivered the opinion of the court.

It is assigned as error that the court overruled the motion of the plaintiff in error to require the district attor *542 ney to furnish him a list of all the witnesses to be produced against him on the trial in accordance with the provisions of section 1033 of the Revised Statutes. [18 U.S. C.A. § 562], That statute applies only to the trial of treason and capital cases in the courts of the United States. The present case was tried in a territorial court under the Penal Code and Code of Criminal Procedure of Alaska. Those Codes contain no requirement that a list of witnesses be furnished the accused upon demand or otherwise. In Thiede v. Utah Territory, 159 U.S. 510 — 515, 16 S.Ct. 62 , 40 L.Ed. 237 , it was held that section 1033 does not control practice and procedure in territorial courts. The court said: “In the absence of some statutory provision, there is no irregularity in calling a witness whose name does not appear on the back of the indictment or has not been furnished to the defendant before the trial.”

It is contended that the court erred in sustaining the objection of the district attorney to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.