Summary
affirming defendant's grand larceny conviction and upholding time limits of thirty minutes or less because issues did not appear numerous or complicated and the issues involved in the case could have been fully presented in allocated time
Summary of this case from State v. TilghmanOpinion
Appeal from the Court of Sessions of Placer County.
The defendant was indicted and convicted of grand larceny. On the trial, and before argument, the Court announced that it would limit the arguments of the counsel for the prosecution in his opening and closing, to three-quarters of an hour, and that for the defense to half an hour--which rule was enforced, under the exception of defendant, who appeals, assigning this as error.
COUNSEL
C. J. Hillyer, for Appellant.
Wm. T. Wallace, Attorney-General, for Respondent.
JUDGES: The opinion of the Court was delivered by Mr. Justice Terry. Mr. Chief Justice Murray concurred.
OPINION
TERRY, Judge
Upon the trial of this cause, and before the argument, the Court announced that the counsel for the people should be limited to three-quarters of an hour, in his opening and concluding arguments, and the counsel for the defendant to a half hour.
The enforcement of this rule is the only error assigned. The establishing and enforcement of such rules are matters resting in the sound discretion of the Court, and are often necessary, to prevent the time of the Court from being wasted in useless and unprofitable discussion.
It does not appear that the issues raised in this case were numerous or complicated, or that they could not have been fully presented in the time allowed; nor is there any allegation that injustice has been done to the defendant by the verdict, or that the longest argument would have been likely to change the result.
Judgment affirmed.