State v. Martin

Citations

• 47 S.C. 67
• 25 S.E. 113
• 1896 S.C. LEXIS 112

Syllabus

<p>1. Murder — Circumstantial Evidence — Corpus Delicti. — 'Where a body has been found, circumstantial evidence is admissible for the purpose of showing the identity of the body found with the person of the deceased.</p> <p>2. Evidence. — In a murder case, it is harmless error to permit a witness to state that the deceased worked with him one year before the alleged homicide.</p> <p>3. Ibid. — It is competent for a witness to state that he saw a person shortly before the alleged homicide, although he did not know him personally, when he describes him and gives the circumstances under which he met him, corroborative of other facts sworn to by other witnesses.</p> <p>4. Ibid. — It is competent to admit in evidence a board taken from the floor of the house in which defendant lived at time of alleged homicide, upon which were said to be blood stains; and the fact that it was cut from the floor nine or ten mouths after does not affect its competency.</p> <p>5. Expert Evidence — Physicians.—Physicians may give their opinion as experts, as to whether certain stains on a board are blood stains.</p> <p>6. Charge. — The charge of the Circuit Judge, taken as a whole, is not objectionable.</p> <p>7. Corpus Delicti. — The proof of the corpus delicti is a question of fact for the jury, and cannot be reviewed by this Court.</p>