Reaves v. State

• Decision Date: 21 January 1909
• Citation: 48 So. 373,158 Ala. 5
• Parties: REAVES v. STATE.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

48 So. 373

158 Ala. 5

REAVES v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Alabama

January 21, 1909

Appeal from City Court of Anniston; Thomas W. Coleman, Jr., Judge.

Collie Reaves was convicted of the murder of Joel Shivers, and he appeals. Affirmed.

The charges refused to the defendant are as follows: "(1) I charge you, gentlemen of the jury, that it is your duty to consider the entire evidence in making up your verdict, and that you should not single out any part of the testimony and base your verdict upon it, and unless the jury and each individual member of the jury are convinced beyond all reasonable doubt, and to the exclusion of every other reasonable hypothesis but that of the defendant's guilt then the jury cannot convict the defendant. (2) If there is a reasonable probability in the mind of any single juror in the case of the innocence of the defendant, growing out of any portion of the evidence, then the jury must give the defendant the benefit of this, and not convict him. (3) If there is a probability of the innocence of the defendant growing out of any portion of the evidence, the jury should give the defendant the benefit of this, and acquit him. (4) If you have a reasonable doubt as to whether the defendant acted in defense of himself and brother, and as to whether they were free from fault in bringing on the difficulty, and whether there was no reasonable mode of escape open to them you should give the benefit of this, and acquit him."

Tate &amp Walker, for appellant.

Alexander M. Garber, Atty. Gen., for the State.

DOWDELL J.

The statement made by the deceased person the night after the shooting in reference to the difficulty, and which was sought to be proved by the defendant, was properly excluded on objection of the state. This evidence was not offered as a dying declaration, since no predicate was laid for that purpose, and otherwise it was illegal as hearsay evidence.

There was no reversible error in sustaining the state's objection to the question by the defendant to his witness R. A. Reeves on direct examination: "Did Mary say, just before the shooting, 'He is talking to me, not to you, Collie; not to you?' " The ground of the objection was that the question was leading. The question was undoubtedly a leading one, and objections to leading questions are addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court, and as a general rule are not revisable. Greenleaf on Evidence, § 435.

...