State v. Carter

• Decision Date: 25 February 1929
• Docket Number: 29709
• Citation: 120 So. 864,167 La. 1080
• Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
• Parties: STATE v. CARTER

120 So. 864

167 La. 1080

STATE v. CARTER

No. 29709

Supreme Court of Louisiana

February 25, 1929

Appeal from Twenty-Second Judicial District Court, Parish of Washington, Prentiss B. Carter, Judge.

Carl Carter was convicted of manslaughter, and he appeals.

Affirmed.

Brock &amp Carter, of Franklinton, for appellant.

Percy Saint, Atty. Gen., C. S. Frederick, Dist. Atty., of Covington, and E. R. Schowalter, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

OPINION

LAND, J.

Defendant is charged with murder, but was tried for manslaughter, and was found guilty. From a sentence of not less than one nor more than three years in the state penitentiary, defendant has appealed, and assigns the errors complained of in the trial court in five bills of exceptions.

Bill No. 1.

It appears from this bill that while the sheriff of Washington parish was on the stand as a state witness, the fact that Leonard, another state witness, had been in jail and had been detained as a material witness, was brought out on cross-examination by the defense.

On re-examination, the district attorney asked the sheriff "Why did you move him, Leonard, from the Washington Parish jail to St. Tammany Parish jail?"

The sheriff answered that he removed the witness under the order of the court, without stating any further reasons for his action. This question was objected to by the defense "on the ground that no reason the sheriff may have had, or any apprehension he might have had on his mind, was far-fetched and has nothing to do with the trial of the defendant, and has a tendency, and, evidently, the purpose of the District Attorney was, to prejudice the mind of this jury against this defendant, and trying to bolster up the testimony of the witness, Leonard, who admitted on the stand that he had lied."

The clerk was ordered by the court not to take down the statement made by counsel for defense with reference to the witness Leonard, "who admitted on the stand he had lied."

The defense then requested that the following notation be made by the clerk: "The court refused to allow counsel for defendant to put the reason in for his bill."

As the sheriff did not give any individual reason or state any apprehension on his part, as to why he removed the witness, the objection of the defense to his answer, that he had done so under the order of the court, is shorn of any prejudicial force or effect.

It was not until after the clerk had taken down the questions and answers of the sheriff and the objection of counsel above quoted, that the defense further objected "to any testimony going to this jury tending to show that the court had anything to do with this witness, or where he was kept, because it is liable to prejudice the mind of the jury against the defendant." This objection came too late, as the answer of the witness had already gone to the jury without challenge as to the admissibility of the testimony. See note of evidence, T. p. 18.

The statement of counsel for the defense with reference to the witness Leonard, "who admitted that he had lied," was not a proper objection to the testimony of the sheriff, but a mere argument or conclusion of the counsel for defense as to the credibility of another witness, which it was not necessary for the clerk to take down, as a basis for the bill reserved, under Act No. 113 of 1896.

We find no error in the ruling of the trial judge.

Bill No. 2.

In this bill it is stated vaguely that the court refused to allow counsel to state the reasons for his objection to a question, propounded by the district attorney to the sheriff of Washington parish, a state witness.

The per curiam to the bill shows that the court did not refuse to allow counsel to state his reasons for his objections, and under the settled jurisprudence of this state, the statement of the trial judge must prevail.

If this bill refers to the facts detailed in bill No. 1, the refusal of the trial judge to order the clerk to take down the statement of counsel for defense,...