Langhorne v. Commonwealth

Citations

• 76 Va. 1012
• 1882 Va. LEXIS 101

Syllabus

<p>1. Criminal Practice—Evidence.—Bill of exceptions must show the relevancy and materiality of the excluded testimony to j ustify reversal of ruling of court below.</p> <p>2. Idem—Impeachment of witness.—It is not admissible to ask witness if he has not been convicted of an offence, which does not involve his character for truth on oath. Uhl’s case, 6 Gratt. 706.</p> <p>3. Idem—Idem—Bias.—It is proper to ask witness if he has any ill-feeling towards the prisoner, but not to introduce evidence of collateral facts, such as the pendency of a suit between them, and the like; and if he deny ic, he may be contradicted by evidence of his own statements or acts, to which, however, his attention must first be specially dráfon.</p> <p>4. Idem—Idem.—No question as to irrelevant facts can be asked witness for the purpose of impeaching his credit by contradicting him ; but if asked and answered, his answer will be conclusive. Nor can any question be asked- which may furnish a single remote link in the chain of testimony, which may implicate him in a crime.</p> <p>5. Idem—Idem.—The proper question to be asked of impeaching witnesses is: “Do you know the general character of the witness for truth and veracity, in the neighborhood in which he resides, or recently resided?”</p> <p>6. Idem—Case at bar.—L was indicted and convicted under criminal procedure of 1878, ch. 3, § 3, Acts 1877-8, p. 287, for burning a tobacco factory.”</p> <p>Held :</p> <p>He was properly prosecuted under that section—a “ tobacco factory ” being, in the sense of the statute, a “ manufactory.”</p>