State v. Crump

Citations

• 116 La. 978
• 41 So. 229
• 1906 La. LEXIS 611

Syllabus

<p>1. Homicide — Evidence — Dying Declarations—Appeal.</p> <p>The defendant was indicted for manslaughter, found guilty and recommended to the mercy of the court. The objection of the defendant to the admissibility of evidence was general, and did not point out the inadmissible words of the declaration. Grounds not urged below will not be considered on appeal.</p> <p>2. Same—Evidence—Malice.</p> <p>The fact that the testimony for the stale may have gone slightly beyond the crime charged because of the issues as presented by defendant will not afford ground sufficient to set aside the verdict. If there was malice on the part of defendant it only added to the gravity of the offense.</p> <p>3. Same—Sele-Defense.</p> <p>The testimony of defendant admitted to prove that plea, i. e., self-defense, justified the ruling, which permitted the introduction of testimony by the state to which the defendant objected.</p> <p>4. Same—Trespass Vel Non.</p> <p>The defendant sought to prove he had not committed a trespass, that he was on a peaceable mission at the time of the homicide. The testimony offered by the State was properly admitted.</p> <p>5. Same — Testimony as to Conversation Heard.</p> <p>The witness heard the conversation which was pertinent to the issue. The testimony was admissible in corroboration of other testimony.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>