Scott v. State
| Decision Date | 21 July 1904 |
| Parties | SCOTT v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from City Court of Selma; J. W. Mabry, Judge.
Pearl Scott was convicted of murder in the second degree, and appeals. Affirmed.
The appellant in this case, Pearl Scott, was jointly indicted with Florence Leftwich, Clay Hillman, and William Briggs for the murder of John Scully. The defendant William Briggs demanded a severance, which was granted, and Pearl Scott Florence Leftwich, and Clay Hillman were jointly tried. Upon the trial the jury rendered a verdict of not guilty as to Florence Leftwich and Clay Hillman. Pearl Scott, the appellant, was convicted of murder in the second degree, and sentenced to imprisonment in the penitentiary for 12 years.
The indictment under which the appellant was tried and convicted charged that she and her codefendants "did unlawfully and with malice aforethought kill John Scully, alias Jack Scully, by administering to him a quantity of morphine." The defendant demurred to the indictment upon the following grounds: (1) It fails to allege that the morphine was a poison. (2) It fails to allege facts showing that the death of the deceased resulted from the morphine alleged to have been administered. (3) It fails to show what quantity of morphine is alleged to have been administered to deceased. (4) It fails to allege that sufficient quantity of morphine was administered to produce death. (5) It fails to show how the morphine was administered, or in what particular quantity. (6) It fails to allege that the morphine was administered with intent to kill, or was such as was calculated to destroy human life. This demurrer was overruled, and defendant duly excepted.
On the trial of the case the state introduced as its first witness the undertaker, who testified that he was present at the autopsy held over the body of John Scully; that as the result of this autopsy the stomach and its contents, a lung, a piece of the liver, and other organs of the body of John Scully were packed in a box, and shipped to B. B. Ross, the state chemist, at Auburn, Ala.; that the box and its contents were delivered to the agent of the express company in Selma. The next witness introduced by the state was the agent of the express company, who testified to having received and shipped to B. B. Ross, at Auburn, Ala., the box referred to by the former witness, containing portions of the body of John Scully. The state then introduced as its next witness B. B Ross, who testified that he was a chemist, and had been engaged as a chemist for about 20 years; that he was professor of chemistry at the Alabama Polytechnic Institute at Auburn, Ala., and was, by virtue of such position, state chemist, and had been such for 10 years or more. This witness also testified to having had varied experience in chemistry and that he had had great experience in toxicology, which he taught both theoretically and practically. The witness Ross further testified to his having received from the undertaker in Selma the box containing the portions of the body of John Scully, which was sent, and that he had made an analysis of the stomach. Upon being asked what poison he found, if any the defendant objected to the question upon the ground that the corpus delicti had not been established. The court overruled this objection, and the defendant duly excepted. The witness testified that he found morphine. Against a similar objection on the part of the defendant, he testified to making an analysis of the liver, in which he also found morphine. In answer to the several questions propounded to him, this witness testified to having found a quantity of morphine by his analysis of the stomach and its contents that, in order to produce death, the morphine had to be absorbed, and that the quantity of the morphine which he found by his analysis was surplusage, or that much more than was necessary to kill the person; that from what had been disclosed to him he was of the opinion that the person's death was due to morphine. The defendant separately and severally objected to each of the questions evoking such testimony on the part of the witness Ross upon the grounds that the corpus delicti had...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
St. John v. State, 7 Div. 329
...523, 42 So.2d 525, reversed 252 Ala. 308, 42 So.2d 532, cert. den. 252 Ala. 659, 42 So.2d 534; a chemistry professor, Scott v. State, 141 Ala. 1, 37 So. 357; an employee of the State Toxicologist's Department who was not a physician, Maund v. State, 254 Ala. 452, 48 So.2d 553; an undertaker......
-
Jackson v. State
...523, 42 So.2d 525, reversed 252 Ala. 308, 42 So.2d 532, cert. den. 252 Ala. 659, 42 So.2d 534; a chemistry professor, Scott v. State, 141 Ala. 1, 37 So. 357; an employee of the State Toxicologist's Department who was not a physician, Maund v. State, 254 Ala. 452, 48 So.2d 553; an undertaker......
-
Cobb v. State
...523, 42 So.2d 525, reversed 252 Ala. 308, 42 So.2d 532, cert. den. 252 Ala. 659, 42 So.2d 534; a chemistry professor, Scott v. State, 141 Ala. 1, 37 So. 357; an employee of the State Toxicologist's Department who was not a physician, Maund v. State, 254 Ala. 452, 48 So.2d 553; an undertaker......
-
McDowell v. State, 6 Div. 375.
... ... reversible error in overruling the objections of the ... defendant to the evidence based upon the failure to show the ... corpus delicti, whether they came before or after the same ... had been established. The trial judge may determine the order ... of the proof. Scott v. State, 141 Ala. 1, 37 So ... 357; Parham v. State, 147 Ala. 57, 42 So. 1 ... The ... trial court did not commit reversible error in excusing ... witness Jackson from the rule. "When witnesses are ... placed under the rule, it is discretionary with the presiding ... judge, to ... ...