Skip to main content

State v. Alexander

Citations

  • 89 Kan. 422
  • 131 P. 139

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Criminal Law — State Impeaching its Own Witness — Judicial Discretion. The rule that a party is not allowed to impeach his own witness is subject to exceptions. Where a witness for the state had testified on direct examination to a commotion and to the appearance of a wounded man, and on cross-examination had testified to exclamations made by the wounded man, testimony of another witness for the state that the witness first referred to was drunk at the time is considered admissible in the discretion of the court.</p> <p>2. Homicide — Exclamation of Deceased — Admissible. Where a wounded man coming out of a stairway from an upper room exclaimed, “I’m shot,” and then said, “Take me home,” and being asked “Who shot you?” gave the name of one of three persons who were with him in the room immediately before the shooting, and the wounded man died in about, ten minutes afterwards, his exclamation and answer are admissible in evidence.</p> <p>3. Impeaching Witness — On Collateral Matter — Inadmissible. Evidence should not be admitted to contradict a statement of a witness elicited upon cross-examination upon a purely collateral matter which does not tend to prove or disprove an issue in the case, the contradictory evidence being offered by the party eliciting the statement.</p> <p>4. HoMiciDE^-Fmcfewee of Scuffle Before Shooting — Exclusion Was Error. A witness for the state testified to an encounter-between several persons in which one was shot. A defendant who was present at the affray testified that another, also present, fired the shot. He was then asked whether there was a scuffle before the shooting. In the circumstances shown the evidence was admissible, and an objection on the ground that the question was leading was not well taken, although the objection might have been avoided by relating the entire occurrence.</p> <p>5. Remarks — Of Attorney in Closing Argument — Improper and : Prejudicial. .A remark in the closing argument fo

Judges: Benson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

14 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this 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.