Bird (vs) U.S., 180 US 356, 21 S.Ct. 403 (1901) pg. 391
Stated: "It is well settled that the defendant has a right to a full statement of law from the court, and that a neglect to give such full statement, when the jury consequently fall into error, is sufficient reason for reversal. ...The chief object contemplated in the charge of the judge is to explain the law of the case, to point out the essentials to be proved on the one side and the other, and to bring into view the relations of the particular evidence addressed to the particular issues involved."
|