State v. Broadhurst
| Decision Date | 09 July 1948 |
| Citation | 184 Or. 178,196 P.2d 407 |
| Parties | STATE <I>v.</I> BROADHURST |
| Court | Oregon Supreme Court |
1. The statutes providing that when two or more persons are charged in the same indictment, a particular defendant may be discharged in order that he may be a witness are applicable only to the trial of co-indictees and although it is not expressly declared that a co-indictee is not a competent witness in trial of other defendant, the statutes assume his incompetency, so long as the charge pends against him. O.C.L.A. §§ 26-924, 26-925.
Witnesses — Accused — Own request — Competent witness
2. The purpose of statute providing that an accused shall, at his own request, but not otherwise, be deemed a competent witness, is to enable the person accused of crime to testify but the statute does not confine itself to the trial of co-indictees and is applicable in all criminal proceedings. O.C.L.A. § 26-934.
Statutes — Repeals by implication
3. Statutory repeals by implication are not favored.
Witnesses — Common law — Separate indictment — Same crime — Competent witnesses
4. At common law, persons who are separately indicted for the same crime are competent witnesses either for or again each other, though the charges are still pending against them.
Witnesses — Competent witness — Separate indictment — Same crime
5. Statute providing that accused shall, at his own request, but not otherwise, be deemed a competent witness, did not affect competency as a witness of a person who was separately indicted for the same crime as accused. O.C.L.A., § 26-934.
Witnesses — Separate indictment — Same crime as accused — Competent witness.
6. Person who was separately indicted for the same crime as accused and whose indictment was still pending was competent to testify either for or against the state. O.C.L.A., §§ 3-102, 3-103, 26-924, 26-925, 26-932, 26-934.
Criminal law — Statement to jury — Proof — Rejected — Good faith
7. Error cannot be predicated on a statement to the jury that certain proof, which is later rejected, will be offered, if the question of its admissibility is a close one and the attorney making the statement acts in good faith.
Criminal law — Opening statement — Proper — Good faith
8. In murder prosecution, district attorney had good cause to believe that he would be permitted to introduce evidence concerning the contents of letters and telegrams addressed by accused to wealthy victim, and opening statement by district attorney that accused by letters and telegrams had outlined her qualifications and proposed marriage was made proper as made in good faith.
Criminal law — Corroboration — Accomplice's testimony — Material particulars
9. Corroboration necessary to sustain testimony of accomplice need not establish crime beyond reasonable doubt independent of confederate's testimony, but it is only necessary to corroborate him in material particulars. O.C.L.A., §§ 2-1001, 26-939.
Criminal law — Fabricated or suppressed evidence — Circumstantial evidence.
10. Facts showing that accused fabricated or suppressed evidence are circumstantial evidence which are not only admissible but which frequently possess high degree of potency.
Criminal law — Conspiracy — Corroborated by evidence
11. In prosecution for murder by proxy of wealthy victim whom accused had purported to marry, testimony of proxy tending to prove a conspiracy was sufficiently corroborated by evidence of adulterous relationship between accused and proxy, acts performed by accused in preparation for the crime, procuring victim to make will in favor of accused, fabrication and destruction of evidence by accused, and failure of accused to display emotion when it first appeared that accident may have befallen victim. O.C.L.A. §§ 2-1001, 26-939.
Criminal law — Proxy — Testimony introduced by State — State did not vouch for credibility
12. In prosecution for murder by proxy of wealthy victim whom accused had purported to marry, the state by introducing the testimony of proxy did not vouch for his credibility and was not bound by portion of his testimony tending to show that he shot victim in self-defense. O.C.L.A., §§ 2-204, 2-1001, subd. 4, 4-709, 26-939.
Homicide — Aggressor — Self defense — Withdrew in good faith — Notice to assaultee
13. An aggressor cannot claim that he struck fatal blow in self-defense unless, before the blow, he withdrew in good faith from the combat, and in addition brought home to assaulted party notice of his intention in such way that assaulted party, as a reasonable man, must have known that assault was ended.
Homicide — Self defense — Evidence insufficient
14. In prosecution for murder by proxy of wealthy victim whom accused had purported to marry, evidence was insufficient to show that proxy shot victim in self-defense. Homicide — Evidence sufficient for jury
15. In prosecution for murder by proxy of wealthy victim whom accused had purported to marry, evidence was sufficient for jury.
Criminal law — Collateral crimes — Serve a material issue
16. Evidence of other crimes is not admissible if its sole purpose is to blacken defendant's character but evidence which serves a material issue is not inadmissible merely because it shows that accused committed collateral crimes.
Criminal law — Bigamous and adulterous relationship
17. In prosecution for murder by proxy of wealthy victim whom accused had purported to marry, evidence of bigamous and adulterous relationship between accused and proxy served legitimate purpose and was not admissible because showing commission of other crimes by accused.
Criminal law — Ruling on evidence — Reason — Not prejudicial
18. In prosecution for murder by proxy, statement by trial judge to counsel in pointing out reason for ruling on evidence that testimony related to the declaration of a co-conspirator was not prejudicial as taking from jury the issue of whether accused and proxy were co-conspirators.
Criminal law — Instructions — Aiding and abetting — Independent proof
19. In prosecution for murder by proxy, where issue of whether accused aided and abetted proxy was submitted to jury by various instructions couched in different words, portions of instructions in which court stated that proxy would be an accomplice within statute and that it was not necessary to show by independent proof a link between an accomplice's testimony and corroborating proof, in explanation of the weight to be accorded testimony of proxy, were not improper as being argumentative or taking from jury the issue of whether accused was a co-conspirator. O.C.L.A., § 2-1001, subd. 4.
Homicide — Matters occurring after homicide and subsequent to consummation of conspiracy — Admissible
20. In prosecution for murder by proxy evidence of search for weapons used in assault, regarding automobile used by proxy, and testimony by proxy of effort suggested by accused to simulate innocence were properly admitted through involving matters occurring after alleged homicide, and subsequent to consummation of alleged conspiracy. O.C.L.A., § 23-207.
Homicide — Testimony — Search for weapons
21. In prosecution for murder by proxy, testimony regarding search for weapon was not rendered inadmissible by fact that proxy accompanied searchers. Criminal law — Automobile — Painted after crime — Material
22. In prosecution for murder, evidence that on day following homicide, automobile which had been used in connection with commission of crime was painted new color so as to render identification difficult was material, there being substantial evidence that accused suggested that the painting be done.
Homicide — Suggestion made to accomplice — Admissible — Material
23. In prosecution for murder by proxy, testimony by proxy that accused had recommended that the two go to scene of search for missing victim and pretend to help was not deprived of admissibility because suggestion was made to an accomplice, and was material because showing an effort to simulate innocence.
Homicide — Appearance and attitude of victim — Prior to murder — admissible
24. In prosecution for murder by proxy of wealthy victim whom accused had purported to marry, testimony regarding the appearance and attitude of victim some time prior to the murder after returning from a trip on which he had seen accused was admissible.
Criminal law — Statement prior to purported marriage — Remoteness
25. In prosecution for murder by proxy of wealthy victim whom accused had purported to marry, testimony of statement made by accused prior to purported marriage that a relative had left accused a large sum of money and that estate was being probated was not objectionable on ground of remoteness.
Searches and seizures — Taking purse and contents — Time of arrest
26. Taking purse from defendant at time of her arrest and taking contents therefrom was not an unlawful search. Const. Or. art. 1, § 9; U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 4.
Searches and seizures — Relatives — Use and occupancy — Search warrant — Guests — Police
27. Relatives to whom owner had given use and occupancy of home needed no search warrant to justify them in searching home nor did they need search warrant to justify them in inviting to home any guests, though such guests were police officers. Const. Or. art. 1, § 9; U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 4.
Searches and seizures — Papers — Home — After arrest and incarceration
28. In prosecution for murder by proxy of wealthy victim whom accused had purported to marry, where victim had given use and occupancy of home to relatives, although victim thereafter resided therein with accused, admission of various papers, letters and documents found in the home and taken after the arrest and incarceration of accused did not violate her constitutional rights. Const. Or. art. 1, § 9; U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 4. Indictment and information — Quash indictment — Grand...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Owen
...of self-defense. State v. Cates, 97 Mont. 173, 33 P.2d 578; Rowe v. U. S., 164 U.S. 546, 17 S.Ct. 172, 41 L.Ed. 547; State v. Broadhurst, 184 Or. 178, 196 P.2d 407. As we have heretofore noted, assuming the facts as stated by the defendants themselves, their defense has little, if any, supp......
-
People v. Chism
...N.E.2d 620 (1966) (Parent who owns or controls home in which child resides can consent to search of premises.)OREGON State v. Broadhurst, 184 Or. 178, 250--251, 196 P.2d 407 (1948), cert. den. 337 U.S. 906, 69 S.Ct. 1046, 93 L.Ed. 1718 (1949) (Relatives to whom owner had given use and occup......
-
State v. Chinn
...the state urged in part that the search was founded on the consent of one of the tenants of the apartment. See State v. Broadhurst, 184 Or. 178, 251, 196 P.2d 407 (1948). The trial court, as noted, made no findings. As the element of consent is the only fact in substantial dispute, however,......
-
Anderson ex rel. Poe v. Gladden
...48 Or. 416, 428, 87 P. 137; State v. Case, 61 Or. 265, 122 P. 304; State v. Hale, 141 Or. 332, 335, 18 P.2d 219; State v. Broadhurst, 184 Or. 178, 216, 196 P.2d 407, 423. The rule has, however, been severely criticized. In State v. Broadhurst, supra, we quoted with approval the following fr......