Hogan v. State
| Decision Date | 12 December 1921 |
| Docket Number | 21990 |
| Citation | 127 Miss. 407,90 So. 99 |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
| Parties | HOGAN v. STATE |
CRIMINAL LAW. Homicide. Circumstantial evidence must exclude, every other hypothesis; evidence leaving it indifferent which hypothesis is true is insufficient; evidence held insufficient to sustain conviction of murder.
While circumstantial evidence is in its nature capable of producing the higest degree of moral certainty, yet experience and authority admonish us that it is a species of evidence in the application of which the utmost caution and vigilance should be used. It is always insufficient, where, assuming all to be true which the evidence tends to prove, some other hypothesis may still be true, for it is the actual exclusion of every other hypothesis which invests mere circumstances with the force of truth. Whenever the evidence leaves it indifferent which of several hypotheses is true, or merely establishes some finite probability in favor of one hypothesis rather than another, such evidence cannot amount to proof, however great the probability may be. The facts in this case examined, and held insufficient to sustain a conviction.
APPEAL from circuit court of Bolivar county, HON. W. A. ALCORN Judge.
Sam Hogan was convicted of murder, and he appeals. Reversed, and defendant discharged.
Judgment reversed, and defendant discharged.
Sillers Clark & Sillers, for appellant.
H. C. Holden, assistant attorney-general, for the state.
Sam Hogan was indicted and convicted for the murder of Isabella Gatewood. The evidence is circumstantial, and the defendant at the close of the state's evidence moved the court for a directed verdict of not guilty, which motion was overruled, and the defendant rested his case upon the state's evidence.
The deceased lived in the house with the defendant and his wife. The testimony shows that Dr. Allen, a physician, made an examination of the head of the deceased before a coroner's jury on Monday following her death on Sunday. The doctor testified that there were three wounds on the back of the head near the ear and one upon the face. He was unable to say whether the skull was fractured or not, and he made no examination of the rest of her body. He also testified: That on Monday night preceding this examination he was called to see the deceased at the residence of the defendant, the defendant coming for him, and when he visited her in the house of the defendant he found her throat bruised, and she stated that she had been choked by two men, one of whom she stated that she thought was the defendant. On one night preceding this examination she stated that she had stepped out of the house, and that some one grabbed her and choked her, and felt under her clothing for the bag in which she carried some money. The defendant was present when she made these statements to the doctor, and made no denial or other statement concerning these statements of Isabella Gatewood. The following morning the doctor again examined Isabella Gatewood and found no bruises on her body, other than the signs of being choked and some rawness of the throat resulting therefrom. On the following Wednesday or Thursday, between the Monday night when she is said to have been choked and the date of her death, and the examination on Monday before the coroner's jury, he, the doctor, saw her upon the gallery at the house of the defendant. That he did not visit her on that occasion, and that she was on the front gallery. That the defendant and the deceased lived immediately behind the residence of Dr. Allen and behind his garden. Also that Sam Hogan's wife, Rosa, lived in the house. The deceased is said to have died on Sunday.
Jerry Butts testified: That he saw the deceased the day before she died. That he called at the defendant's house and asked about Isabella, and that the defendant said she was doing fine. Witness went away, and came back, and went in the room where Isabella was lying in bed, and saw the blood running out of her left ear, and she made no answer when spoken to. The door to the room was closed and the windows pulled down. That two sisters of the defendant were in the house at the time.
William Douglas testified: That he saw the deceased on Saturday, before she died on Sunday. That he had a hard time getting inside of the house, and that Rosa, the wife of the defendant, and his two sisters, objected to his going inside the house. They said that Isabella Gatewood was lying in a dark room on a bed. That she made one squall, but did not answer when he called her.
Sylvia Van testified that she was at the house of the defendant on Friday evening before she died on Sunday She met defendant on the street before going to the house, and he told her that Isabella was resting very well. She also saw the wife of the defendant, and she said that Isabella was resting well. Defendant's wife and two of his sisters tried to persuade the witness not to go in the house and bother the old lady. She said the old lady in the room was making a great fuss. She was afraid to go in the room, but pushed the door open, and saw her in the dark room.
Dr. Flake testified that on August 10th, preceding her death, he prepared a will for the deceased. This will was introduced in evidence, and shows that the deceased willed the defendant all of her property. He also testified that some time before the death of the deceased she came to his house with the deed that originally conveyed ten acres of land to the defendant, but the number ten had been changed to the number twenty, but the description of the land had not been altered. Deceased was complaining about this deed having been altered.
Charles Anderson testified: That deceased originally had a deposit in the bank of which he was cashier of thirty-two dollars and fifty cents. This deposit was made by the defendant, and all except one dollar was drawn out by check signed by the defendant as agent of the deceased. This deposit was made by means of a check payable to the deceased drawn by Ferris & Latimer, for fifty-two dollars and fifty cents, and that the defendant collected twenty dollars cash from the check when he made the deposit. That the deposit slip showed a deposit of fifty-two dollars and fifty cents with notation "less twenty dollars cash." That later some old woman came to the bank...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sauer v. State
... ... which of several hypotheses is true, or merely establishes ... some finite probability in favor of one hypothesis rather ... than another. Such evidence cannot amount to proof however ... great the probability may be ... Algheri ... v. State, 25 Miss. 584; Hogan v. State, 127 Miss ... 407, 90 So. 99; Sorrels v. State, 130 Miss. 300, 94 ... So. 209; Webb v. State, 73 Miss. 461, 19 So. 238; ... Williams v. State, 95 Miss. 671, 49 So. 513; ... Miller v. State, 99 Miss. 226; Irving v ... State, 100 Miss. 208, 56 So. 377; Smith v ... State, ... ...
-
Dean v. State
...that which supports innocence must be accepted, even though the theory supporting the guilt may be more probable. See Hogan v. State, 127 Miss. 407, 90 So. 99; Algheri v. State, 25 Miss. 584, 1 Morris Cases, 658. It is no pleasure to chronicle these things. I would much prefer, in all cases......
-
Dean v. State
...because of this fact, it is peculiarly useful in weighing evidence and drawing conclusions. Hunter v. State, 137 Miss. 276; Hogan v. State, 127 Miss. 407; Taylor v. State, 108 Miss. 18; Sorrells v. State, 130 305. There was not sufficient evidence of motive. At least the hypothesis that lov......
-
Fisher v. State
... ... 2 and 3 asked for and granted to the state were erroneous and ... calculated to mislead the jury. Lee v. State, 124 ... Miss. 398. The court erred in refusing instruction number 5 ... asked for and refused by the court. Circumstantial evidence ... must exclude every other hypothesis. Hogan v. State, ... 127 Miss. 407, 90 So. 99; Nalls v. State, 128 Miss ... 277, 990 So. 892; Sorrells v. State, 130 Miss. 300, ... 94 So. 209; Irving v. State, 100 Miss. 208. These ... same authorities hold good for instruction 6. The court erred ... in refusing instruction number 7 ... ...