Green v. State

• Decision Date: 06 February 1893
• Citation: 97 Ala. 59,12 So. 416
• Parties: GREEN v. STATE.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

12 So. 416

97 Ala. 59

GREEN v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Alabama

February 6, 1893

Appeal from circuit court, Sumter county; S. H. Sprott, Judge.

Steptoe Green was convicted of murder in the first degree, and appeals. Affirmed.

The evidence in this case, is substantially the same as was disclosed in the transcript when here on former appeal, and which is reported in 11 South. Rep. at page 478. The rulings of the court upon the pleadings and evidence on the second trial are sufficiently stated in the opinion. The defendant requested the court to give the following written charges and separately excepted to the court's refusal to give each of them: (11) "The court charges the jury that the evidence in this case is purely circumstantial." (13) "The evidence in this case is wholly circumstantial. In order to justify a verdict of guilty of murder in the first degree, the circumstances must be so connected and complete as to exclude to a moral certainty every reasonable hypothesis but that of the guilt of the accused of murder in the first degree. If the proof does not come up to this full measure, and the evidence is equally reconcilable with the theory that the defendant is guilty only of murder in the second degree, then the jury should not find the defendant guilty of murder in the first degree." (16) "Proof of contradictory statements, declarations, or testimony on material points by the witness Mary Jane Autrey may be sufficient to raise a reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury of the truth of the witness' testimony, and, if the jury have such a reasonable doubt of the truth of her testimony, then they should reject her testimony, and should not consider it against the defendant in making up their verdict." (18) "Proof of contradictory statements declarations, or testimony on material points by the witness Emma Marr may be sufficient to raise a reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury of the truth of the witness' testimony, and if the jury have such a reasonable doubt of the truth of her testimony, then they should reject her testimony, and should not consider it against the defendant in making up their verdict."

Smith Van Degraff & Travis, for appellant.

Wm. L Martin, Atty. Gen., for the State.

STONE C.J.

On the 10th day of October, 1892, the circuit court of Sumter county being in session, the court made the following orders in reference to the trial of Steptoe Green, the appellant in this case: "Comes J. S. McEachin, solicitor, who prosecutes for the state, and the defendant, Steptoe Green, being present in person and by attorneys, and the said defendant having heretofore, and at a former term of this court, to wit, on the 17th day of October, 1891, been arraigned in open court on the indictment in this cause, and he having then and there entered his plea of 'Not guilty,' the court now sets Wednesday of the 2d week of this term of this court, the same being Wednesday, the 19th day of October, 1892, for the trial of this cause; and it is ordered by the court that the names of fifty (50) special jurors be drawn according to law, which names of jurors, together with the names of the petit jurors who have been drawn and summoned as petit jurors for the second week of this term of this court, shall constitute the venire for the trial of this cause." Before proceeding to trial, the prisoner, through his counsel, moved to quash the venire served upon him for his trial, because the name of M. B. Rosenbush was omitted therefrom. There was nothing in this motion, and the court correctly overruled it. M. B. Rosenbush, though summoned by the sheriff, had not been drawn as one of the jurors for the week in which the trial was ordered to take place, and did take place. Had his name been put on the venire, it would have been ground of objection on the part of defendant, if he had sought to avail himself of it. To be a competent and legal juror in such conditions, the person tendered, and notice thereof given, must have been drawn, as well as summoned. M. B. Rosenbush had not been drawn. Code 1886, §§ 4306, 4309, 4320, 4322, 4324; Floyd v. State, 55 Ala. 61; Posey v. State, 73 Ala. 490. This ruling is not opposed to the principles declared in Phillips v. State, 68 Ala. 469; Parsons v. State, 22 Ala. 50; Sylvester v. State, 71 Ala. 17.

Chapman a witness for the state, was asked the question. "How long the defendant had lived on the Chapman place?" He answered, "Steptoe Green had lived on the place all his life." The question and answer were separately objected to, as calling for irrelevant evidence. The objections being severally overruled, the defendant separately excepted. The place, which the testimony tends to show was the scene of the killing, was in a dense forest, thickly covered with undergrowth, and in every way a very secret place. It was off from and near to the neighborhood road, which the testimony shows deceased and the accused were traveling, engaged at the time in angry altercation. The place of the homicide was probably the most obscure and...