State v. Brown

Citations

• 111 La. 170
• 35 So. 501
• 1903 La. LEXIS 514

Syllabus

<p>PERJURY—EVIDENCE — INDICTMENT — CROSS-EXAMINATION—INSTRUCTIONS—ARREST OE JUDGMENT.</p> <p>1. In a case in which perjury was the crime charged, the record of the civil suit wherein it was charged the accused had committed perjury offered for the restricted purpose of showing the jurisdiction of the court to try the case and the materiality of the testimony.</p> <p>2. It must appear on the face of the indictment that the matter sworn to was material, or “there must be an averment charging that it was material, and an express averment of materiality lets in the evidence.” Roseve.</p> <p>3. Evidence not pertinent, nor in answer to any question, a statement in the nature of a preface, which could not injure defendant, is not ground for annulling proceedings.</p> <p>4. A conversation between counsel and his client is not admissible.</p> <p>5. On cross-examination a latitude is allowed to test memory of the witness.</p> <p>6. There is no necessity to have it appear that the accused had been sworn in another case than the one in which he is charged with perjury, before it can be required of him to testify as to what he said as a witness.</p> <p>7. The trial judge cannot be required to reiterate that which he has already said to the jury.</p> <p>8. The court properly charged the jury that the drunken condition of the accused at the time was a question of fact for the jury.</p> <p>9. The fact charged had direct bearing upon the point at issue, and was material.</p> <p>10.An arrest of judgment will only be decreed for illegality or irregularity apparent on the face of the record.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>