State v. Harris
Decision Date | 01 May 1893 |
Docket Number | 11,271 |
Citation | 45 La.Ann. 842,13 So. 199 |
Court | Louisiana Supreme Court |
Parties | THE STATE OF LOUISIANA v. ELIAS A. HARRIS |
APPEAL from the Fourth District Court, Parish of Grant. Ware J..
M. J Cunningham, Attorney General, and R. E. Milling, District Attorney, for the State, Appellee.
R. P Hunter, for Defendant and Appellant.
The accused was indicted for murder and convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to hard labor. He appealed.
There are several bills of exceptions in the record.
No. 1 contains a variance of statement of facts between counsel and trial judge. On the repeated rulings of this court, we accept the latter's statement. It completely destroys the effect of the bill. The statement also shows that the district attorney withdrew his objection to the introduction of proof, without first showing an overt act on part of deceased, of threats communicated to the accused.
The second bill is as follows:
The tendency of recent adjudications is to extend rather than to narrow the scope of the introduction of evidence as part of the res gestae. As a general rule, when it is necessary to inquire into the general nature of the act committed, or the intention of the party who did the act, proof of what the person said at the time of doing it is admissible evidence as part of the res gestae, for the purpose of showing its true character. The general rule also is that the declaration sought to be proved must be contemporaneous with the event sought to be proved as the principal act; but when there are connecting circumstances they may, even when made some time afterward, form a part of the whole res gestae. 8 Wallace, 397; 55 Penn. 402; 57 Mo. 93; 34 American Reports, 479; 38 An. 459, 949; 44 An. 958.
Mr. Taylor, in the Law of Evidence, gives the fourth rule for the test of the admissibility of such evidence, as follows:
"That an act can not be varied, qualified, or explained by a declaration which amounts to no more than a mere narration of a past transaction, nor by an isolated conversation, nor by an isolated act done at a later period." Taylor on Evidence, paragraph 523.
The trial judge's statement is that the ear had been severed in the fight, and that this fact had been proved.
The finding of a piece of the ear on the ground, immediately after the difficulty, was a fact competent to be proved, to show the fact of the severance of the ear, and the wounds inflicted upon the deceased. The act of stamping upon the ear, and the refusal to give it to the boy, was a fact contemporaneous with the discovery of the ear, and inseparable from the narration of its discovery by the boy. The refusal to let the boy have the piece of ear was also competent and admissible evidence to prove that the accused endeavored to suppress evidence as to the fact of its having been torn or bitten off during the fight.
The incident of kicking the cap toward the boy, and ordering him to leave his premises, is so insignificant that it would be an absurdity and a denial of justice to disturb the verdict because...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Dreher
... ... decided solely by the court, which is necessarily vested with ... the discretion to disregard testimony it deems unworthy of ... belief. State v. Ford, 37 La.Ann. 443; State v ... Janvier, 37 La.Ann. 644; State v. Jackson, 37 ... [166 La. 972] La.Ann. 896; State v. Harris, 45 ... La.Ann. 842, 13 So. 199, 40 Am. St. Rep. 259; State v ... Christian, 44 La.Ann. 950, 11 So. 589; State v ... Nash, 46 La.Ann. 194, 14 So. 607; State v ... Beck, 46 La.Ann. 1419, 16 So. 368; State v ... Green, 46 La.Ann. 1522, 16 So. 367; State v ... Compagnet, 48 ... ...
-
Hollywood v. State
...72 N.H. 32.) The tendency is to extend rather than to narrow the doctrine of res gestae. (Jack v. Mut. Res. Fund, 113 F. 49; State v. Harris, 45 La. Ann. 842; R. R. Co. McLane, 11 App. D. C. 220; R. R. Co. v. O'Brien, 119 U.S. 99; R. R. Co. v. Coly, 55 Pa. 402; Boat Co. v. Brackett, (U. S.)......
-
State v. Boudreaux
... ... the whole evidence, and when that is the case we are bound to ... take his ruling as conclusive.' ... In the ... case of State v. Green, 46 La.Ann. 1522, 16 So. 367, ... the decisions in State v. Ford, 37 La.Ann. 443, and ... State v. Harris, 45 La.Ann. 843, 13 So. 199, 40 Am ... St. Rep. 259, were again quoted in support of the doctrine ... that it is within the discretion of the trial judge to ... determine whether there is sufficient proof of an overt act ... by the deceased to admit evidence of his prior threats or ... ...
-
State v. Jefferson
... ... 536 at 540; State v. Duffy, ... 39 La.Ann. 419, 2 So. 184; State v. Seiley, 41 ... La.Ann. 143, 6 So. 571; State v. Demareste, 41 ... La.Ann. 617, 6 So. 136; State v. Mitchell, 41 ... La.Ann. 1073, 6 So. 785; State v. Christian, 44 ... La.Ann. 950 at 954, 11 So. 589; State v. Harris, 45 ... La.Ann. 842 at 846, 13 So. 199, 40 Am. St. Rep. 259; ... State v. Stewart, 45 La.Ann. 1164 at 1166, 14 So ... 143; State v. Nash, 46 La.Ann. 194 at 210, 14 So ... 607; State v. Barker, 46 La.Ann. 798 at 804, 15 So ... 98; State v. Beck, 46 La.Ann. 1419 at 1421, 16 So ... 368; ... ...