Caddell v. State
| Citation | 136 Ala. 9,34 So. 191 |
| Parties | CADDELL v. STATE. |
| Decision Date | 16 April 1903 |
| Court | Supreme Court of Alabama |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Bibb County; Wm. F. Hogue, Special Judge.
Festus Caddell was convicted of murder, and appeals. Affirmed.
The appellant in this case, Festus Caddell, was jointly indicted with Lillian Gardner, alias Lilly Gardner, for the murder of Mamie Caddell, the wife of Festus Caddell, by shooting her with a pistol. On motion of the defendant a severance was had, and the defendant in the present case was tried separately, was convicted of murder in the first degree, and sentenced to the penitentiary for life.
The evidence for the state tended to show that the defendant Festus Caddell, and his co-defendant, Lillian Gardner conspired together to kill Mamie Caddell, the deceased; that Lillian Gardner was the paramour of Festus Caddell and the illicit relation between them had been sustained for some time; that Mamie Caddell was killed by a pistol shot which was fired by Lilly Gardner; that this shot was fired just after Lilly Gardner had a conference with Festus Caddell. The facts relating to the circumstances of the killing, on this appeal, are substantially the same as they were when the case was in this court on the former appeal, and special reference is here made to the report of the case on that appeal. Caddell v. State, 129 Ala. 57, 30 So. 76.
One A P. Davidson was introduced as a witness for the state, and testified that he knew Mamie Caddell and the defendant Festus Caddell. In answer to the interrogatory propounded to him as to whether or not he had ever heard the defendant make any threats against his wife, the witness answered that he heard the defendant some weeks prior to the killing say that he would kill anybody that would interfere with him and Mrs. Gardner. There was other testimony on the part of the witness Davidson relative to the relation existing between the defendant and Mrs. Gardner.
Against the objection and exception of the defendant the state proved that Mamie Caddell, the deceased, had commenced a prosecution against Mrs. Gardner for living in adultery with the defendant, Festus Caddell, by making an affidavit to that effect before a justice of the peace, upon which affidavit a warrant was issued. This affidavit and warrant were introduced in evidence against the objection and exception of the defendant.
The defendant offered to prove that Mrs. Gardner was at the time of the trial an inmate of an insane hospital. Upon the state objecting to the introduction of this evidence, the court sustained the objection, and refused to allow the defendant to prove that Mrs. Gardner was an inmate of an insane hospital To this ruling the defendant duly excepted. The other facts of the case necessary to an understanding of the decision on the present appeal are sufficiently stated in the opinion.
The defendant separately excepted to the following portions of the court's oral charge to the jury:
Cato D. Glover, for appellant.
Chas. G. Brown, Atty. Gen., and W. W. Lavender, for the State.
The objection to the evidence of the witness, Davidson, was general and to the whole of it in mass. If any of it was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Travelers' Ins. Co. v. Whitman
...of the res gestae, though made by a mere bystander, in many of the states (11 Ency. of Ev. 337; 16 Cyc. 1155); and in this state (Caddell v. State, supra; N.C. & St. L. v. Moore, 148 Ala. 63, 67, 41 So. 984; Benjamin v. State, 148 Ala. 671, 41 So. 739 [1]). Declarations of third persons, ho......
-
Hammond v. State
...while it is the better practice to refuse such charges, yet the giving of the charge does not constitute reversible error. Caddell's Case, 136 Ala. 9, 34 So. 191, and cases there It has been strenuously urged by counsel for the appellant that the record proper fails to show the presence of ......
- Jackson v. State
-
Birmingham Electric Co. v. Wood
...... suit, is a material inquiry, notwithstanding they are not. verified by oath. Richardson v. State, 204 Ala. 124,. 85 So. 789. . . But. such pleadings are not admissible as admissions, or as. evidence to impeach a party thereto, ... whole was overruled without error. Longmire v. State, 130 Ala. 67, 30 So. 413; Caddell v. State, 136 Ala. 9, 34 So. 191; Ray v. State,. 126 Ala. 9, 28 So. 634. . . The. general rule is that a statement of facts, or the ......