State v. Pettilla

Citations

• 116 Wash. 589
• 200 P. 332
• 1921 Wash. LEXIS 986

Syllabus

<p>Criminal Law (¿137)—Evidence — Hearsay — Declarations by Third Persons. In a prosecution for criminal syndicalism, it is prejudicial error to admit hearsay testimony by witnesses who had talked with various persons, at different times and places, who, the witnesses believed, were members of the I. W. W., or assumed by the witnesses to be members, and that in those conversations such persons had revealed the purposes and objects of the I. W. W. organization.</p> <p>Insurrection—Criminal Syndicalism—Evidence—Admissibility. In a prosecution for criminal syndicalism, witnesses may testify as to statements, speeches, and declarations made by members of the I. W. W. organization, or in their presence, at recognized meetings or assemblages of the organization in their various headquarters, or in such places and on such occasion as are proven to have received the sanction of the organization; and may also testify as to conversations, in which are revealed the principles, teachings, objects and purposes of the organization, with members whose membership is shown by competent testimony and proven to be of such a character as to show it carried the authority of the organization to make the declarations as to its' purposes, objects, principles, and teachings.</p> <p>Jury (59-1)—Perembtory Challenges—Joinder—Codeeendants. Under the statute granting defendants six peremptory challenges in criminal cases, where there are several defendants, all must join in the challenges, the statute not contemplating that each defendant shall have a right to the full number of peremptory challenges.</p>