Commonwealth v. Jones
Decision Date | 28 February 1946 |
Citation | 319 Mass. 228,65 N.E.2d 422 |
Parties | COMMONWEALTH v. HELEN JONES. |
Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
February 4, 1946.
Present: FIELD, C.
J., QUA, DOLAN WILKINS, & SPALDING, JJ.
Evidence Photograph; Opinion: expert. Practice, Criminal Discretionary control of evidence. Witness Cross-examination.
No error appeared in the admission, during redirect examination of a medical examiner at the trial of an indictment charging manslaughter, of photographs showing a knife wound in the breast of the deceased, although the witness had already testified in detail as to the wound, where it appeared that the photographs, during the witness's cross-examination, had been given to counsel for the defendant at such counsel's request, and there was nothing to indicate that their admission inflamed the jury or prejudiced the defendant.
On the issue of self defence at the trial of an indictment charging manslaughter, the individual opinion of a bystander as to whether the defendant was put in reasonable apprehension of immediate peril at the hands of the deceased was inadmissible.
INDICTMENT, found and returned on February 6, 1945, charging manslaughter.
The case was tried before Sullivan, J.
H. D. Sharpe, for the defendant. G. E. McGunigle, Assistant District Attorney, for the Commonwealth.
The defendant was convicted upon an indictment for manslaughter in causing the death of Effie Barber. The defendant's appeal is accompanied by an assignment of errors, a summary of the record, and a transcript of the evidence. G. L. (Ter Ed.) c. 278, Sections 33A-33G, as amended by St. 1939, c. 341. Three assignments of error are argued.
1. The first assignment of error relates to the admission in evidence during the redirect examination of the medical examiner of three photographs showing a knife wound in the breast of the deceased. The medical examiner had given the photographs to counsel for the defendant at his request during cross-examination. There was no error. It is not a valid objection to admissibility that the medical examiner had already testified in detail as to the wound and other conditions shown by the photographs. There is nothing to indicate that their admission inflamed the jury or prejudiced the defendant in any way. Commonwealth v. Gray, 314 Mass. 96 , 98, and cases cited.
2. The third assignment of error concerns an incident which arose during the direct examination of Dorothy Craig, a sister-in-law of the defendant, who was called as a witness by the Commonwealth. The witness had testified at some length as to the occurrences of the evening of January 22, 1945, and of the early morning of January 23, when the deceased met her death as a result of a knife wound at 40 Sterling Street Roxbury, where the deceased, the defendant, and the witness resided. The transcript of the testimony shows that there was from time to time much difficulty in hearing the witness, who was frequently asked both by the assistant district attorney and by the judge to speak louder so that she might be heard. The judge then interrupted the examination and said, After some further questions and answers there was a conference at the bench at the conclusion of which the judge said, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Borella v. Renfro
...teammate that Lever checked Borella with intent to injure. Mass. G. Evid. § 701 note, at 239 (2019). See Commonwealth v. Jones, 319 Mass. 228, 230, 65 N.E.2d 422 (1946), citing Smith v. Commonwealth, 113 Ky. 19, 25, 67 S.W. 32 (1902) (bystander's testimony as to his belief as to victim's in......
-
Com. v. Campbell
...it was permissible to ask whether he had been compelled by Campbell to do anything against his will. See Commonwealth v. Jones, 319 Mass. 228, 230-231, 65 N.E.2d 422 (1946). However, we consider the error to have been harmless. Counsel for Campbell was permitted to ask Calvin a number of ot......
-
Com. v. Rodriguez
...Ortiz's opinion that the defendant reasonably feared for his life, which was itself inadmissible (see Commonwealth v. Jones, 319 Mass. 228, 230, 65 N.E.2d 422 [1946] ), was based in large part on the out-of-court statements of the defendant's wife (the wife "told me ... her husband was very......
-
Commonwealth v. Noxon
...v. Giacomazza, 311 Mass. 456, 470, 471, 42 N.E.2d 506;Commonwealth v. Venuti, 315 Mass. 255, 52 N.E.2d 392;Commonwealth v. Jones, 319 Mass. 228, 65 N.E.2d 422. As to the photomicrographs, there was evidence of their trustworthiness, and the judge was so satisfied. It follows that these phot......