State v. Barrett
Citations
- 117 La. 1086
- 42 So. 513
- 1906 La. LEXIS 821
Syllabus
<p>1. Witnesses — Examination — Impeachment — He arsax .</p> <p>• The question whether the witness had not, at the office of the examining counsel, stated thus and so, was not objectionable, either as tending to elicit hearsay or as an impeachment of the witness by the party offering him; nor, if the witness was unwilling, as leading.</p> <p>2. Same — Cross-Examination.</p> <p>Por the purpose of impeaching his credibility, the defendant, testifying in his own behalf, may be asked on cross-examination whether he has not been prosecuted for other offenses.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 50, Witnesses, §§ 1132, 1140, 1146.]</p> <p>3. Criminal Law — Declarations oe Accomplice — Evidence.</p> <p>The three accused killed the deceased by shooting at him through the walls of a house. Their defense was that they were on his bond in a criminal case and were trying to arrest him, and he was resisting. Por discrediting this defense the prosecution offered to prove that on the night of the killing one of the defendants had sent for whisky; and the defendants objected to the evidence, on the ground that “it was irrelevant, not connected with the transaction, near a mile from the scene of the trouble, and out of the presence of the other defendants.” Held that, under the peculiar circumstances of the case, the evidence might have been relevant, and that the appellate court, not being possessed of all the facts, cannot undertake to say that the evidence was not relevant. Held, secondly, that the declarations of one of the participants in a crime, when forming part of the res gestee, are admissible against his associates.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 15, Criminal Law, §§ 2933, 2934.]</p> <p>4. Same — Impeachment op Verdict.</p> <p>A juror cannot be permitted to impeach his own verdict; and still less may the verdict be impeached by the proof of statements said to have been made by the juror after his discharge.</p> <p>[Ed.
Judges: Breaux, Nicholls, Sty
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
1 case in this archive cites this case.
Cites
16 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- State v. DonelonSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1893-05-15· cited 25×
- State v. HuffNevada Supreme Court· 1876-01-15· cited 22×
- State v. BatesSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1894-05-15· cited 22×
- People v. HamblinCalifornia Supreme Court· 1885-11-26· cited 19×
- State v. SouthernSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1896-02-29· cited 14×
- State v. MurphySupreme Court of Louisiana· 1893-05-15· cited 13×
- State v. BirdSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1886-05-15· cited 12×
- State v. TaylorSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1893-04-15· cited 12×
- State v. KennonSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1893-10-15· cited 9×
- State v. WalshSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1892-12-15· cited 8×
- State v. JacksonSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1892-02-15· cited 6×
- State v. CorcoranSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1898-04-18· cited 6×
- State v. AlexisSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1893-06-15· cited 5×
- State v. UnderwoodSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1892-06-15· cited 4×
- State v. NashSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1893-06-15· cited 4×
- State v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1900-01-15· cited 3×
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.