Merrill v. State

Citations

• 58 Miss. 65

Syllabus

<p>1. Evidence. Homicide. Copy of writing containing dying declarations.</p> <p>It is not error, in the trial of a charge of homicide, to admit in evidence a true copy of a writing containing the'dying declarations of the victim, if the original be admissible, where such copy was made under the belief that the original, having been written with a pencil, was of no value, and the latter has been lost.</p> <p>2. Same. Homicide. Hying declarations, when admissible.</p> <p>It is error to admit as evidence, in a trial for homicide, the dying declarations of the victim to the effect that two weeks before the perpetration of the deed the defendant had made threats against his life; because such threats constitute no part of the res gestee, and the admission of the dying declarations should be restricted thereto.</p> <p>3. Same. Murder. Practice. Leading question.</p> <p>M. being on trial for the murder of P., S., a witness for the State, testified that P., in articulo mortis, told him “that M. had shot him, and that he would not get over it.” The district attorney then asked the witness, “Did P. tell you who shot him, after he told you he would not get over it?” The defendant objected to the question as leading, but the objection -was overruled, and the witness answered, “He did.” Held, that the objection was properly overruled.</p>