Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Supreme Court· 1/4/1897

Carver v. United States

Citations

  • 164 U.S. 694
  • 17 S. Ct. 228
  • 41 L. Ed. 602
  • 1897 U.S. LEXIS 1704

Syllabus

<p>In a trial for murder, if the declarations of the deceased are offered, the fact that she had received extreme unction has á tendency to show that she must have known that she was in articulo mortis, and it is no error tq admit evidence of it.</p> <p>Where the whole or a part of a conversation has been put in evidence by the government on the trial of a person accused of the commission of crime, the other party is entitled to explain, vary or contradict it.</p> <p>When the dying declarations of the deceased are admitted on the trial of a person accused of the crime of murder, statements made by the deceased in apparent contradiction to those declarations are admissible.</p>

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • finding no error where prosecution witness testified that probable cause existed after defense attempted to establish on cross-examination that arrests were without probable cause
  • “As these declarations are necessarily ex parte, we think the defendant is entitled to the benefit of any advantage he may have lost by the want of an opportunity for cross-examination.”
  • “In nearly all the cases in which the question has arisen, evidence of other statements by the deceased inconsistent with his dying declarations has been received.”
  • “As these declarations are necessarily ex parte, we think the defendant is entitled to the benefit of any advantage he may have lost by the want of an opportunity for cross-examination.”
  • inconsistent hearsay statement admissible to impeach dying declaration already admitted

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Brown, Brewer, Peckham

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Other cases named Carver v. United States

23 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.