Hall v. Commonwealth
Citations
- 89 Va. 171
- 15 S.E. 517
- 1893 Va. LEXIS 64
Syllabus
<p>1. Homicide—Fixing day of trial—Acts 1889- 90, p. 79.—This statute,. requiring the court to fix the day of trial of a criminal case ten days before commencement of the. term, is merely directory, and the-omission to comply with it—</p> <p>Held :</p> <p>Ho ground to set aside a verdict of guilty.</p> <p>2. Jurors—Competency—Case at bar.—In a trial for murder, a juror on voir dire said that newspaper accounts had made an impression on his mind, but that “ it would yield to evidence,” and that he could give prisoner a fair and impartial trial. A second said the same, and that he would not be willing to act on those accounts, but that it would take, evidence to remove the impression. A third said he had not formed “ a decided opinion,” but an impression that “ would be right hard to get over, but that it would not require sworn statements to remove it.”</p> <p>Held:</p> <p>These jurors were competent.</p> <p>3. Dying Declarations—Case at bar.—Shortly after being shot deceased said to his wife: “ It is a death shot this time,” and that he wanted to go to heaven when he died; but did not express belief he was going to die. To others he told who shot him and the circumstances* but did not say anything about dying. He died twenty-four hours-after being shot.</p> <p>Held :</p> <p>His declarations were admissible as evidence.</p> <p>4. Instructions, unsupported by any evidence, should be refused.</p> <p>5. Idem—Case at bar.—-Instructions having been given to the jury that they could not find prisoner guilty of murder in the first- degree,, unless the evidence showed him guilty “ to the exclusion of all reasonable doubt,” and the jury having found him guilty of murder in. first degree—</p> <p>Held :</p> <p>The prisoner could not have been prejudiced by the refusal of the court to instruct the jury that “ the evidence of his guilt must be so strong as to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of ihs innocence”; and that “ mere suspicion, however strong, is not sufficient; the l
Judges: Lewis
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
10 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Commonwealth v. BrownSupreme Court of Virginia· 1894-03-29· cited 26×
- Barber v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia· 1965-06-14· cited 23×
- State v. EkangerNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 1899-10-21· cited 19×
- Wallen v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia· 1922-11-16· cited 19×
- Satterwhite v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Virginia· 2010-07-27· cited 18×
- Clark v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Virginia· 1986-12-02· cited 9×
- Pippen v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia· 1915-09-09· cited 5×
- Hoyt v. United StatesSecond Circuit· 1921-05-11· cited 4×
- Gauss v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia· 1925-01-15· cited 3×
- Womack v. CircleSupreme Court of Virginia· 1877-09-15
Cites
7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Honesty v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia· 1886-01-07· cited 40×
- Wash v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia· 1861-10-29· cited 16×
- Mitchell v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia· 1880-11-15· cited 14×
- Swisher v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia· 1875-09-30· cited 11×
- Epes' CaseGeneral Court of Virginia· 1848-12-15· cited 10×
- Washington v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia· 1889-12-05· cited 4×
- Bird Woods v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia· 1890-06-19· cited 4×
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.