State v. Baruth

Citations

• 47 Wash. 283
• 91 P. 977
• 1907 Wash. LEXIS 754

Syllabus

<p>Criminal Law—Declarations in Presence of Accused—Admissions. Ante mortem statements of deceased relating to tbe issues, made in the presence of the accused, are admissible, where she was at home in another room with the door open within easy hearing, and were made under such circumstances that she would without doubt have replied thereto if she did not wish to acquiesce therein; but statements made after the door between the rooms was closed, while the accused was engaged in conversation, although she might have heard and denied the same, are not made in her presence or under circumstances calling for a reply.</p> <p>Same—Relevancy. Ante mortem, statements of deceased, made in the presence of the accused, are admissible only so far as they relate to the shooting from which death resulted, its immediate cause, and the conduct of the parties at the time which was part of the res gestae; and statements of conduct at other times, or irrelevant to the issue, are inadmissible.</p> <p>Homicide—Cause of Death—Neglect of Physician—Defenses. The fact that wounds inflicted by shooting were not skillfully treated or accorded the best medical treatment is no defense to a prosecution for homicide where it is not shown that neglect or unskillfulness was the sole cause of the death.</p> <p>Criminal Law—Appeal—Failure to Request Instruction. In a prosecution for homicide, the failure to caution the jury as to admissions by the accused by acquiescence in an ante mortem statement made in her presence is not reversible error where no request was made for such instruction.</p>