State v. Collins
Decision Date | 24 January 1925 |
Docket Number | 420. |
Citation | 126 S.E. 98,189 N.C. 15 |
Parties | STATE v. COLLINS. |
Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
Appeal from Superior Court, Anson County; Lane, Judge.
Jim Collins was convicted of murder, and he appeals. Affirmed.
Evidence held to warrant submission to jury of a question whether defendant had time for premeditation and deliberation.
The prisoner was charged with the murder of A. C. Sedberry on July 19, 1924, and he appealed from the judgment pronounced on conviction for murder in the first degree. At the trial he did not testify or introduce any evidence. The salient features of the state's evidence are substantially as follows:
On the day of the homicide the deceased was engaged in scraping the public road leading from White Store to Peachland. He and Baxter McRae were running a road grader, which was pulled by a truck; McRae operating the truck and the deceased the grader. They met a car driven by Frank Gulledge, in which were Jack Polk, Henry Watts, and Jack Crowder. The prisoner was on the running board. During a part of 1924 the prisoner had worked for the deceased, but had left him, and was employed by William Gulledge when the homicide occurred. The deceased had the car to stop when it approached the truck and this conversation followed:
Sedberry "Jim, why did you do like you did this morning?"
Collins "Did what?"
Sedberry: "Send Oscar Gulledge for the money."
Collins: "I just sent him."
Sedberry: "Ain't you a man of your own?"
Collins: "I am."
Sedberry: "Why did you not come and get it?"
Collins: "I just didn't come."
Sedberry: "I owe you $2.37, and carried you one night to see the doctor, didn't I?"
Collins: "You did."
Sedberry: "I didn't intend to charge you for that, if you had staid your time out that you hired to work, but, as you did not, I am going to charge you $2.50 for that trip; that leaves you owing me 13 cents, and I am going to strike off even with you."
Collins: "I don't give a d___n what you do with it."
Sedberry (after stepping down from the road machine): "Don't you cuss me."
Collins: "I didn't cuss you."
Sedberry: "You cussed at me."
The subsequent conduct of the two is described by Baxter McRae:
Jack Polk testified as to the shooting:
The foregoing testimony was corroborated by other witnesses, but under cross-examination they modified or varied their statement as to some of the circumstances. There was also evidence tending to show that the deceased beat the prisoner on the head, and caused him to become highly excited; that, soon after the fatal shot was fired, the prisoner said that he had shot a man, and wanted to give himself up to the sheriff; that he told William Gulledge that he had shot the deceased, and wanted his money at once; that Gulledge told him to go to Ben White's, and stay there until he could go to the store and get some change, but a large crowd soon gathered near by; that the deceased was a white man, 6 feet in height, weighing about 215 pounds, and the prisoner a colored boy about 19 or 20 years of age.
Dr. Hart testified as follows:
Other testimony is referred to in the opinion.
H. H. McLendon and H. P. Taylor, both of Wadesboro, for appellant.
James S. Manning, Atty. Gen., and Frank Nash, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
On his cross-examination the sheriff testified that he learned of the homicide about noon, and went immediately to White Store and thence to the home of Henry Collins, the prisoner's brother. He was then asked this question:
"Did you receive information from the defendant's brother, Henry, that he was close by and ready to surrender?"
The state's objection was sustained and the prisoner excepted.
There are two grounds upon which the ruling may be sustained: (1) Neither the form of the question nor the record indicates what the answer would have been. State v. Ashburn, 187 N.C. 717, 722, 122 S.E. 833; Barbee v. Davis, 187 N.C. 79, 85, 121 S.E. 176; Hosiery Co. v. Express Co., 186 N.C. 556, 120 S.E. 228; State v. Jestes, 185 N.C. 735, 117 S.E. 385; Snyder v. Asheboro, 182 N.C. 708, 110 S.E. 84. (2) The proposed evidence was inadmissible as hearsay. Evidence is termed hearsay when its probative force depends in whole or in part upon the competency and credibility of some person other than the witness from whom the information is sought, and such evidence, with certain recognized exceptions not applicable here, is uniformly held to be objectionable; the declarant not having spoken under the sanction of an oath, and not having submitted to cross-examination. Chandler v. Jones, 173 N.C. 427, 92 S.E. 145; State v. Springs, 184 N.C. 768, 114 S.E. 851.
The witness testified further that, soon after he arrived at the scene of the homicide, he saw probably 75 armed men between White Store and Gulledge's house, and that on Sunday the number increased possibly to 1,000 men, many of...
To continue reading
Request your trial