Defendant, represented by an attorney, was ordered, under an appearance bond, to appear at the November term of the court of general sessions to answer to an indictment for assault and battery with intent to kill. The indictment was not prepared during the November term, and at the end of the term the court ordered all those whose cases were not called to appear at the next term of court. At the February term defendant's case came up, but his attorney had apparently failed to read the court calendar, as neither the defendant nor the attorney knew that the trial was at hand. Defendant was convicted by a jury in his absence. His attorney filed a motion for a new trial, alleging that the court and prosecuting attorney had not protected defendant's rights as carefully as they would have if counsel for the defendant had been present. The trial court denied the motion for new trial, and defendant appealed. Held, affirmed. Defendant had statutory notice of the terms of court and had the duty to be present. State v. Johnson, (S.C. 1948) 49 S.E. (2d) 6.
CRIMINAL LAW-NEW TRIAL-ABSENCE OF ACCUSED FROM TRIAL BECAUSE OF ATTORNEY'S NEGLIGENCE,
Mich. L. Rev.
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol47/iss3/15