State v. Harris

Citations

• 74 Wash. 60
• 132 P. 735
• 1913 Wash. LEXIS 1998

Syllabus

<p>Homicide — Defenses—Insanity—Burden of Pboof. In a prosecution for murder, it is proper to instruct that the burden of proving insanity as a defense is upon the defendant to establish by the preponderance of the evidence, failing which the presumption of sanity must prevail and the defendant found guilty.</p> <p>Criminal Law — Instructions:—Preponderance of Evidence. An instruction upon the preponderance of the evidence, to establish insanity, that if the jury are unable to say that they conscientiously believe the defendant was insane, the defendant has failed to establish the defense, and that the jury must find the truth, is erroneous in requiring that the defense be established beyond a reasonable doubt, or by more than the weight of the evidence.</p> <p>Criminal Law — Evidence of Confession — Admissibility of Oral Confession.- Where a confession was written down in longhand in the presence of the defendant and read over to him and its truth acknowledged by parol, it is admissible in evidence the same as if signed by him.</p> <p>Criminal Law — Trial—Argument. A confession properly admitted in evidence may be read to the jury in the closing argument of counsel'.</p> <p>Criminal Law — Trial—Right to Open and Close — Defense of Insanity. Where the defense is insanity, the state has the right to open and close, since the main issue is his guilt or innocence, although the defendant has the burden of overcoming the presumption of sanity.</p>