Du Bose v. State
| Citation | 148 Ala. 560,42 So. 862 |
| Parties | DU BOSE v. STATE. |
| Decision Date | 19 December 1906 |
| Court | Supreme Court of Alabama |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Clarke County; S. H. Sprott, Judge.
Tutt Du Bose was convicted of murder in the first degree, and he appeals. Reversed and remanded.
The witness Parker was called for the state, and testified to the killing, and as to tracks leading from near the place of the killing to and from a small tree near the road, and about 20 or 30 feet from where deceased was found lying after the shooting. On cross-examination of this witness the defendant asked the question set out in paragraph 1 of the opinion. The evidence for the state tended to show that the deceased was killed by a gunshot wound under the left shoulder blade from behind, that at a black jack tree about 30 feet from where deceased was found in the road there was evidence of some one having stood, that the defendant was near the scene of the killing about 15 minutes prior to the shooting, and that about that length of time after defendant left witness Parker's house a gunshot was heard. The tracks that went to the place of the killing and that led away from there to the place where defendant was next seen were the same, and were similar to defendant's tracks. The objections to testimony and the rulings of the court thereon are sufficiently set out in the opinion.
Charge 2, given for defendant, was as follows: "(2) The court charges you, gentlemen, that if the evidence, or any part of it, after the consideration of the whole of such evidence generates a well-founded doubt of the defendant's guilt the jury must find the defendant not guilty." Charge 3 refused to defendant, was as follows: "(3) The court charges you, gentlemen of the jury, that if, upon considering all of the evidence, you have a reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the defendant, arising out of any part of the evidence, you must find the defendant not guilty."
Wilson & Aldridge, for appellant.
Massey Wilson, Atty. Gen., for the State.
1. Objection to a question propounded to a state witness, by the defendant on cross-examination, viz.: "If the deceased was not the father of an illegitimate child by the daughter of witness?" was properly sustained, on the ground of irrelevancy and immateriality.
2. The witness, Jewett, was handed a shoe, he had fitted on the tracks leading to and from the scene of the homicide, stating that the shoe and tracks corresponded, and was asked if the shoe had crude rosin on it at the time it was handed to him for the purpose of comparing it with the tracks, which was objected to for immateriality. The court allowed the question on the statement by the solicitor that he expected to show that it was material. The defendant was shown to have been engaged in shipping turpentine, the day of the killing, and next morning, he had discarded his old shoes, and was wearing a new pair, and when asked, where his old ones were, he showed the witness where they were, in the woods near defendant's house. They were found by the witness, who gave Jewett one of them for the purpose of comparison with the said tracks. The evidence tended to show that these were defendant's shoes and the one Jewett testified about, was offered in evidence. His own son testified, that the shoe offered in evidence was his father's.
3. The witness, Walker, testified...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Smith v. State
... ... consideration of the evils generally resulting from the ... commission of such acts, within the limits prescribed by ... The ... rule declared in Cross' Case, supra, has been reaffirmed ... by later decisions of this court. Hill v. State, 146 ... Ala. 51, 41 So. 621; Du Bose v. State, 148 Ala. 560, ... 42 So. 862; Tucker v. State, 167 Ala. 1, 52 So. 464; ... Roden v. State, 5 Ala.App. 247, 59 So. 751; Wall ... v. State, 2 Ala.App. 157, 56 So. 57; Johnston Bros ... v. Brentley, 2 Ala.App. 281, 56 So. 742 ... There ... was evidence adduced by the state ... ...
-
Blue v. State
...cases are worth noting, even though the court in these cases made no effort to disabuse the minds of the jurors: In DuBose v. State, 148 Ala. 560, 42 So. 862, it said: "The solicitor in his closing argument to the jury stated, 'That the good citizens of the municipality had met on the next ......
-
Peterson v. State
... ... surmise or statement of fact not in evidence. That is, ... argument of counsel should be confined to a fair discussion ... of relevant facts and inferences to be drawn from the ... evidence in the case, and, where it exceeds the same, should ... be excluded. Du Bose v. State, 148 Ala. 560, 42 So ... 862; Piano v. State, 161 Ala. 88, 49 So. 803 ... It may ... be well to advert to the observations contained in Cross ... v. State, 68 Ala. 476, as to limitations of arguments of ... "An ... accused person has a constitutional right to be ... ...
-
Chambers v. State
...atmosphere. Blue v. State, supra, (246 Ala. 73, 19 So.2d 11). See also Pointer v. State, 24 Ala.App. 23, 129 So. 787; DuBose v. State, 148 Ala. 560, 42 So. 862." As in Allred, 291 Ala. at 37-38, 277 So.2d at 342 "In answering the question before us, we cannot analyze each statement separate......