Starks v. State
| Decision Date | 11 June 1903 |
| Citation | 137 Ala. 9,34 So. 687 |
| Parties | STARKS ET AL. v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from City Court of Montgomery; William H. Thomas, Judge.
Will Starks and Alexander Means were convicted of murder, and appeal. Affirmed.
On the trial of the case it was shown that about 9 o'clock at night Flem Foster was shot down near the store of one Stanford, and that he died from the effects of said wound. Two of the state's witnesses testified that on the night of the killing, about 9 o'clock, they heard the report of a gun, and, upon going in the direction in which the gun was fired, they found the deceased lying about 25 feet from the corner of the store; that the deceased, on being asked what was the matter, said: and further stating "that he did not know who shot him." The solicitor asked each of these witnesses what else the deceased said. The defendant objected to each of these questions as asked the witnesses respectively, upon the ground that it called for irrelevant immaterial, and incompetent evidence, and called for the dying declaration, for which no sufficient predicate had been laid. The court overruled each of these objections, and the defendants separately excepted. Each of the witnesses testified that the deceased further stated that he was going down a path from the store, and when he was near the store he heard a bell rung which sounded like a bicycle bell; that his attention being directed to the ringing of the bell, he stopped, and that, as soon as he stopped, some one shot him and that the flash of the gun was from the direction of the corner of the store. The evidence for the state further showed that Stanford's store was burglarized on the night of the killing.
The state introduced two witnesses who testified that the defendants made confessions, and that these confessions were voluntary, and were made without any threats made, or by the offer or hope of reward, or any inducement held out. In the confessions so testified to by said witnesses, the defendants admitted that they burglarized the store of Stanford on the night of the killing; that at the time of the killing Alex Means was in the store, and Will Starks was standing watch near the corner of the store; and that, as the deceased stopped, Will Stanford shot him. These witnesses further testified that, upon their asking Starks what he shot the deceased for, he replied: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sales v. State
...must be incident to what was done, as shedding light on the main fact. George v. State, 240 Ala. 632, 200 So. 602 (1941); Starks v. State, 137 Ala. 9, 34 So. 687 (1903); Nelson v. State, 130 Ala. 83, 30 So. 728 (1901). See also McLean v. State, 16 Ala. 672 "Here, deceased replied, 'Eunice d......
-
Lang v. State, 8 Div. 514
...complaint may be received in evidence. Barnett v. State, 83 Ala. 40, 3 So. 612; Nelson v. State, 130 Ala. 83, 30 So. 728; Starks v. State, 137 Ala. 9, 34 So. 687; White v. State, 237 Ala. 610, 188 So. 388; Fowler v. State, 8 Ala.App. 168, 63 So. 40; Daniell v. State, 37 Ala.App. 559, 73 So.......
-
Guntharp v. State
...must be incident to what was done, as shedding light on the main fact. George v. State, 240 Ala. 632, 200 So. 602 (1941); Starks v. State, 137 Ala. 9, 34 So. 687 (1903); Nelson v. State, 130 Ala. 83, 30 So. 728 (1901). See also McLean v. State, 16 Ala. 672 'Here, deceased replied, 'Eunice d......
-
Williams v. State
...must be incident to what was done, as shedding light on the main fact. George v. State, 240 Ala. 632, 200 So. 602 (1941); Starks v. State, 137 Ala. 9, 34 So. 687 (1903); Nelson v. State, 130 Ala. 83, 30 So. 728 (1901). See also McLean v. State, 16 Ala. 672 Here, deceased replied, 'Eunice do......