Turner v. State
| Decision Date | 22 October 1931 |
| Docket Number | 7 Div. 75. |
| Citation | 140 So. 447,224 Ala. 5 |
| Parties | TURNER v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Certiorari to Court of appeals.
James Turner was convicted of murder in the second degree, and the judgment of conviction was reversed by the Court of Appeals (140 So. 445), and the State by and through its Attorney General, applies for certiorari.
Writ granted and cause remanded.
See Turner v. State (7 Div. 121) 140 So. 448.
Thos E. Knight, Jr., Atty. Gen., and Thos. Seay Lawson, Asst Atty. Gen., for the State.
L. H Ellis, of Columbiana, for defendant.
The opinion of the Court of Appeals discloses there was evidence tending to show a conspiracy to murder the deceased; that James Turner, the defendant on trial, and Cecil Bell were parties to such conspiracy; and that there was further evidence, by way of declarations of the conspirators, tending to show an expectation to receive insurance money as a matter of much concern to them in connection with the homicide. Here was some evidence, which, if believed by the jury, tended to support an inference that the motive for the murder was to get insurance money.
With this evidence in the natural and logical inquiry was whether there was insurance on the life of deceased, and to whom it was payable?
We concur in the view that evidence of insurance policies on the life of deceased payable to A. W. Bell, not shown in any way to be a coconspirator, standing alone, would not be evidence of motive on the part of his Nephew Cecil Bell, or his coconspirators.
Neither would mere declarations of these conspirators, in the absence of other evidence, be admissible against A. W. Bell, if charged as a coconspirator.
But it does not follow that evidence of the existence and status of this insurance was not admissible against the parties otherwise shown to be in the conspiracy, and hoping to share in the insurance money.
Such evidence related to a subject-matter already introduced into the case; tended to show the existence of insurance money arising upon the death of deceased.
That it was payable to one not otherwise shown to be in the conspiracy, goes to the weight of the whole evidence on this issue, including the truth vel non of the evidence of the state seeking to set up insurance money as a motive for the killing.
In cases based largely upon circumstantial evidence, a rather wide range of evidence is allowed in developing circumstances...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Harris v. State
...rather wide range of evidence is allowed in developing circumstances tending to show motive on the part of the accused. Turner v. State, 224 Ala. 5, 140 So. 447 (1931); Chambliss v. State, 373 So.2d 1185 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. denied, 373 So.2d 1211 (Ala.1979). Where the evidence is in confli......
-
Boyd v. State
...is circumstantial, a wide range of testimony is admissible to show the motive of defendant for committing the crime charged. Turner v. State, 224 Ala. 5, 140 So. 447; Harden v. State, 211 Ala. 656, 101 So. "In a case where the evidence is circumstantial, evidence of motive becomes of great ......
-
Blanton v. State
...is circumstantial, a wide range of testimony is admissible to show the motive of defendant for committing the crime charged. Turner v. State, 224 Ala. 5, 140 So. 447; Harden v. State, 211 Ala. 656, 101 So. "In a case where the evidence is circumstantial, evidence of motive becomes of great ......
-
Vanpelt v. State, No. CR-06-1539 (Ala. Crim. App. 12/18/2009)
...has never followed such a narrow view regarding the admissibility of life insurance policies in a criminal case. In Turner v. State, 224 Ala. 5, 140 So. 447 (1931), the Alabama Supreme Court "In cases based largely upon circumstantial evidence, a rather wide range of evidence is allowed in ......