Hanye v. State, 7 Div. 435.

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
Writing for the CourtGARDNER, J.
Citation101 So. 108,211 Ala. 555
PartiesHANYE v. STATE.
Docket Number7 Div. 435.
Decision Date26 June 1924

101 So. 108

211 Ala. 555

HANYE
v.
STATE.

7 Div. 435.

Supreme Court of Alabama

June 26, 1924


Appeal from Circuit Court, Cleburne County; A. P. Agee, Judge.

Harry Paul Hanye was convicted of murder in the second degree, and appeals. Affirmed. [101 So. 109]

Merrill & Jones, of Heflin, for appellant.

Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., and O. B. Cornelius, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

GARDNER, J.

Appellant was jointly indicted with his father for the murder of one Ab. Giles. There was a severance. Defendant did not deny the shooting, but pleaded self-defense, and appellant's trial resulted in a conviction of murder in the second degree, from which this appeal is prosecuted.

The defendant, with his father, and members of their respective families, were touring in two automobiles from Atlanta, Ga., to a point in Mississippi, and while upon a narrow hill on a public road in Cleburne county met the deceased, there being a collision between the car of the deceased and that of the defendant's father. The parties were strangers. After the passing of a few words a difficulty ensued, in which the deceased received two pistol shot wounds, one in the neck and the other in the chest, either of which, according to the evidence of the physician, was sufficient to produce death.

The difficulty occurred about 2:30 o'clock in the afternoon of Sunday, June 17, 1923. He received the attention of a physician about 4 o'clock the same afternoon, and died at 10 o'clock that night. The attending physician testified as to these mortal wounds, and that the deceased told him he was going to die. The physician also informed the deceased of his impending death. The court was fully justified in the light of this preliminary proof in admitting the evidence of the physician as to the dying declarations of the deceased. Gerald v. State, 128 Ala. 6, 29 So. 614; Patterson v. State, 171 Ala. 2, 54 So. 696. The dying declarations as testified to by the physician consist of a narrative of the entire difficulty from the time the deceased first met the defendant and his father in the road until after the shooting, all of which was one continuous transaction, and consequently formed a part of the res gestæ. B'ham, etc., Co. v. Tadrick, 205 Ala. 540, 88 So. 858, and authorities there cited. This observation also applies to the objection interposed to the testimony of Sam Giles, the 10 year old son of the deceased.

There was no error in overruling the objection to that part of the dying statement containing the words "abusing him." While we are inclined to the view that all the circumstances clearly show these words had reference only to verbal abuse, and was merely a statement of a collective fact, yet the form of objection renders a consideration of that question unnecessary for the reason the objection specified also included other portions of the statements which were clearly proper, and no separate objection interposed to this particular language.

One Richardson testified on direct-examination for the state that he lived about a quarter of a mile from the place where the shooting occurred, and went to the place, and that he talked with the defendant, who admitted he had shot the deceased. This witness also said that, according to his recollection, the defendant stated that he had taken the pistol from the deceased and shot him with his own gun. The fact that upon cross-examination, upon being asked in detail all [101 So. 110] that was said, the witness omitted this latter statement, did not render inadmissible the testimony to that effect, given by him on his direct examination; this was a matter affecting the credibility of the witness, and not the admssibility of the testimony.

The witness Murphy was permitted, over defendant's...

To continue reading

Request your trial
19 practice notes
  • Burns v. State, 6 Div. 965.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • October 6, 1932
    ...events as detailed to him by deceased constituted a continuous transaction that was admissible as a part of the res gestæ (Hanye v. State, 211 Ala. 555, 101 So. 108; Birmingham Macaroni Co. v. Tadrick, 205 Ala. 540, 88 So. 858). The introduction of the confession of Ogletree, an accomplice ......
  • Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of A. F. & A. M. of Alabama (Colored) v. Callier, 1 Div. 717.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • March 24, 1932
    ...219 Ala. 670, 673, 123 So. 50; Milton v. State, 213 Ala. 449, 105 So. 209; Loeb v. Webster, 213 Ala. 99, 104 So. 25; Hanye v. State, 211 Ala. 555, 101 So. 108. In the examination of the witness, D. N. Foster, the following occurred: "Q. 'As Secretary of Utopia Lodge Number 251 of this Grand......
  • Hale v. Cox, 7 Div. 334
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • June 27, 1935
    ...the witness Batson to detail the contradictory or impeaching statements in respect to the predicate indicated above. Hanye v. State, 211 Ala. 555, 101 So. 108; Williams v. Alabama Fuel & Iron Co., 212 Ala. 159, 102 So. 136; Malloy v. State, 209 Ala. 219, 96 So. 57. Moreover, under the issue......
  • Kendrick v. State, 3 Div. 367
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • July 29, 1975
    ...aloud, or even fainted. Swindle v. State (27 Ala.App. 549, 176 So. 372), supra; Davis v. State, 222 Ala. 285, 131 So. 900; Hanye v. State, 211 Ala. 555, 101 So. 108; Wyres v. State, 32 Ala.App. 630, 29 So.2d 155; Duff v. State, 40 Ala.App. 80, 111 So.2d 621, certiorari denied 269 Ala. 696, ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
19 cases
  • Burns v. State, 6 Div. 965.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • October 6, 1932
    ...events as detailed to him by deceased constituted a continuous transaction that was admissible as a part of the res gestæ (Hanye v. State, 211 Ala. 555, 101 So. 108; Birmingham Macaroni Co. v. Tadrick, 205 Ala. 540, 88 So. 858). The introduction of the confession of Ogletree, an accomplice ......
  • Most Worshipful Grand Lodge of A. F. & A. M. of Alabama (Colored) v. Callier, 1 Div. 717.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • March 24, 1932
    ...219 Ala. 670, 673, 123 So. 50; Milton v. State, 213 Ala. 449, 105 So. 209; Loeb v. Webster, 213 Ala. 99, 104 So. 25; Hanye v. State, 211 Ala. 555, 101 So. 108. In the examination of the witness, D. N. Foster, the following occurred: "Q. 'As Secretary of Utopia Lodge Number 251 of this Grand......
  • Hale v. Cox, 7 Div. 334
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alabama
    • June 27, 1935
    ...the witness Batson to detail the contradictory or impeaching statements in respect to the predicate indicated above. Hanye v. State, 211 Ala. 555, 101 So. 108; Williams v. Alabama Fuel & Iron Co., 212 Ala. 159, 102 So. 136; Malloy v. State, 209 Ala. 219, 96 So. 57. Moreover, under the issue......
  • Kendrick v. State, 3 Div. 367
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • July 29, 1975
    ...aloud, or even fainted. Swindle v. State (27 Ala.App. 549, 176 So. 372), supra; Davis v. State, 222 Ala. 285, 131 So. 900; Hanye v. State, 211 Ala. 555, 101 So. 108; Wyres v. State, 32 Ala.App. 630, 29 So.2d 155; Duff v. State, 40 Ala.App. 80, 111 So.2d 621, certiorari denied 269 Ala. 696, ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT