Press enter after choosing selection

Nolle Prossed Seven Cases

Nolle Prossed Seven Cases image
Parent Issue
Day
10
Month
November
Year
1899
Copyright
Public Domain
OCR Text

NOLLE PROSSED SEVEN CASES

AND PROSECUTING ATTORNEY KIRK GIVES HIS REASONS.

Most of the cases are of long standing and convictions could not be secured.

The prosecuting attorney has nolle prossed a number of cases, as follows:

"People vs. Frances McCoy and Zina McCoy. The defendants in this case are charged with receiving stolen property. This case is of long standing and I do not believe that a conviction can be secured."

"People vs. William Simmons. The before named defendant is charged with assault with intent to do great bodily harm less than the crime of murder in and upon one Christian Seyfried. It is a very doubtful case, as a jury has already disagreed in a case involving the same facts."

"People vs. Frank Hill and Henry Schumacher. The defendants are charged with larceny from the person. The complaining witness resides in the northern part of the state, and apparently manifests no desire to continue the prosecution or offer any evidence in support of the charge."

"People vs. Henry D. Wanty. The defendant is charged with the crime of perjury. The case grew out of a justice court criminal case wherein this defendant was defendant, and in the trial of the case the complaining witness claims that Mr. Wanty perjured himself, but as a jury composed of good, respectable citizens found him not guilty, consequently believing his statements, I am of the opinion that his conviction cannot be secured."

"People vs. Clarence J. Chandler. The defendant is charged with obtaining property under false pretenses. The complainant refuses to appear against said defendant, and as it is impossible to secure his presence being a resident of New York, I recommend that an order nolle prosique be entered in said case."

"People vs. Aaron Canine. The defendant is charged with obstructing a railroad by placing a tie on the track. There is evidence going to show that this defendant is implicated in the commission of the crime charged, but I do not deem it sufficient to warrant a conviction."

"People vs. John O'Grady. The defendant is charged with the crime of rape. In this case the defendant has been on trial in this court on this charge, and the jury disagreed, the majority of said jurors being for acquittal. The people cannot make a stronger case than the one presented on the first trial and I deem in impossible to secure a conviction."