CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-CRIMINAL PROCEDURE-COMMENT BY JUDGE ON EVIDENCE

Authors

Abstract

In the recent case of People v. Kelly, the Illinois supreme court decided (two justices dissenting) that the common law right of a judge, in charging the jury, to comment on the evidence and advise as to the facts was not an essential attribute of trial by jury as it, existed at common law, and held that a statute limiting the charge strictly to matters of law was not an infringement of the right of trial by jury guaranteed by successive Illinois constitutions. The court also decided, in upholding the legislative enactment, that this restriction of the functions of trial judges was not such an assumption of, or interference with, the judicial power as to bring the statute into conflict with the "separation of powers" clauses of the same constitutions. An able dissenting opinion expressed contrary views on both points involved.

Recommended Citation

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-CRIMINAL PROCEDURE-COMMENT BY JUDGE ON EVIDENCE, 30 Mich. L. Rev. 1303 (1932).
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol30/iss8/11