Edwards v. Commonwealth
| Decision Date | 28 November 1911 |
| Citation | 140 S.W. 1046,145 Ky. 560 |
| Parties | EDWARDS v. COMMONWEALTH. |
| Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Grant County.
Millard Edwards was convicted of crime, and he appeals. Reversed and remanded.
M. D Gray, for appellant.
Jas Breathitt, Atty. Gen., and Theo. B. Blakey, Asst. Atty. Gen for the Commonwealth.
Section 1239, Kentucky Statutes (Russell's St. § 3469), provides "When a person is lawfully detained as a prisoner in any jail, or in custody, if any person shall convey anything into the jail or county prison, with intent to facilitate the prisoner's escape therefrom, or shall aid him in any way to escape, or in the attempt to escape from such jail or custody, or shall forcibly rescue, or attempt to rescue him therefrom, if such rescue or escape be effected he shall, if the prisoner was detained on a conviction or on a charge of felony, be confined in the penitentiary not less than one or more than five years."
Millard Edwards was indicted under this statute, it being charged in the indictment in substance that he had conveyed into the jail of Grant county certain tools and implements with intent to facilitate the escape of June Harvey therefrom, who was then confined in the jail under a conviction of felony, and by means thereof escaped from the jail. On a trial of the case the defendant was found guilty as charged and his punishment fixed by the court at confinement in the penitentiary at from one to five years. The defendant appeals.
The proof on the trial tended but slightly to connect the defendant with the offense, except the evidence of Henry Gordon, and his testimony on his direct examination was by no means conclusive as to the defendant's guilt, but the next morning he was recalled to the stand and then made statements positively identifying the defendant as the person who had passed the tools into the jail. On cross-examination it developed that he had declared on more than one occasion that he did not know who passed the tools into the jail, and did not have any knowledge connecting the defendant with it. A letter which he had written so declaring was produced. It also appeared that he had been promised a pardon if he would testify who did it, that he had gotten the pardon, and that he had declared that he had made this statement to get out of jail. His moral character was also impeached by several witnesses. At this stage of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Griffith v. Commonwealth
...Note 41 L.R. A. (N.S.) 949. A witness cannot add weight to his testimony by telling a thing on a different occasion. Edwards v. Commonwealth, 145 Ky. 560, 140 S.W. 1046. The fact that death intervened and prevented his testifying can make no difference. It would be a most dangerous thing to......
-
State v. La Bar
...653, 53 S. E. 104;State v. Porter, 74 Iowa, 623, 38 N. W. 514;Chicago, etc., v. Matthieson, 212 Ill. 292, 72 N. E. 443;Edwards v. Commonwealth, 145 Ky. 560, 140 S. W. 1046; Ware v. Ware, 8 Greenl. (8 Me.) 42; Commonwealth v. Jenkins, 10 Gray (Mass.) 485;Commonwealth v. Tucker, 189 Mass. 457......
-
State v. Bar
... ... 653, 53 S.E. 104; State v. Porter, 74 Iowa 623, 38 ... N.W. 514; Chicago City Ry. Co. v. Matthieson, 212 ... Ill. 292, 72 N.E. 443; Edwards v. Commonwealth, 145 ... Ky. 560, 140 S.W. 1046; Ware v. Ware, 8 Me. 42; ... Commonwealth v. Jenkins, 10 Gray (Mass.) 485; ... Commonwealth v ... ...
-
Preston v. Com.
...other special exceptions, extrajudicial identifying statements were not admissible in evidence. See, for example, Edwards v. Commonwealth, 145 Ky. 560, 140 S.W. 1046 (1911); Gilbert v. Commonwealth, 221 Ky. 692, 299 S.W. 569 (1927); Griffith v. Commonwealth, 250 Ky. 506, 63 S.W.2d 594 (1933......