State v. Guy

Citations

• 107 La. 573

Syllabus

<p>Syllabus.</p> <p>1. A bill of exceptions, in that part of it where the trial judge gives the reasons for his ruling, did not deny the previous statement of the bill that a witness, called in rebuttal by the State, was permitted to impeach a witness for the defense by giving evidence that defendant’s witness had, on a previous trial, testified differently from what the State, in the instant trial, admitted he would swear to were he present — Held, that since the bill is signed by the judge, and since that part of it which he wrote does not deny the specific averment, it must be accepted as true and effect given to it.</p> <p>2. Where the State admits, under Act 84 of 1894, for the purpose of avoiding a continuance, that an absent witness would, if present, testify to certain material facts, proof of counter-declarations made by the witness on another ocoa sion will not be received in evidence. To admit the same would be in violation of the rule requiring a foundation to be laid before introducing the im.peaching evidence.</p>