State v. Phelps
Citations
- 5 S.D. 480
- 59 N.W. 471
- 1894 S.D. LEXIS 84
Syllabus
<p>1. Where i1 affirmatively appears from tlie record that a defendant was neither surprised, misled, nor predjudiced, a motion to quash an indictment on the ground that the name of Moses O. Felker, a witness called and examined before the grand jury, was not indorsed thereon, was properly overruled, when the name Dr. Felker, by mistake, was written instead of Moses C. Felker, and the evidence offered by defendant in support of the motion to quash conclusively shows that the witness was a physician, and for many years had been known and addressed as Dr. or Doc. Felker, and that both the defendant and his counsel clearly understood who was designated, and were fully apprised from the name upon the indictment that Moses C. Felker would appear as a witness on the part of the state in response to the name Dr. Felker, and it was not error to allow such witness to testify upon the trial.</p> <p>2. A motion to quash an indictment on the ground that the regularly appointed deputy state’s attorney, who appeared before the grand jury, and examined witnesses, and performed all the other duties of a state’s attorney, was not at least 25 years of age, was properly overruled, for reasons given in the opinion.</p> <p>8. All distinctions between an accessory before the fact and a principal are by the statute abrogated, and one who procures another to commit a felony, or is concerned in the commission thereof, though not present, must be indicted, tried and punished as a principal.</p> <p>4. The evidence of an accomplice otherwise competent is admissible, and when corroborated by the testimony of other witnesses, forcibly tending to connect the defendant with the commission of the offense charged, is sufficient to sustain a conviction.</p> <p>5. In the absence of a statutory limitation as to the extent to which an accused person testifying in his own behalf can be cross-examined, a defendant who does not claim his privilege, but testifies in his own behalf, and without reservation u
Judges: Fuller
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
12 cases in this archive cite this case.
- State v. KentNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 1895-03-20· cited 77×
- State v. SmithSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1929-12-17· cited 34×
- State v. LongSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1971-03-26· cited 22×
- State v. ColemanSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1904-02-03· cited 19×
- Gasper v. District Court of Seventh Judicial Dist.Idaho Supreme Court· 1953-11-10· cited 17×
- State v. JacksonSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1907-11-20· cited 13×
- State v. MagnusonSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1925-02-24· cited 10×
- State v. KeebleSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1926-02-24· cited 9×
- Lyman County v. StateSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1896-12-23· cited 8×
- State v. KightSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1908-12-31· cited 8×
- State v. HolburnSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1909-05-07· cited 3×
- State v. JohnsonSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1926-10-11· cited 2×
Cites
10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Shular v. StateIndiana Supreme Court· 1886-02-09· cited 75×
- People v. HowardMichigan Supreme Court· 1888-11-28· cited 31×
- People v. LongCalifornia Supreme Court· 1872-04-15· cited 30×
- Wilson v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court· 1880-01-15· cited 30×
- Commonwealth v. TolliverMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1876-01-04· cited 22×
- State v. HuffNevada Supreme Court· 1876-01-15· cited 22×
- Commonwealth v. CrockerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1871-11-15· cited 7×
- Baysinger v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court· 1886-01-25· cited 7×
- United States v. WoodSupreme Court of Dakota· 1887-05-26· cited 6×
- People v. Lee Ah YuteCalifornia Supreme Court· 1882-02-24· cited 5×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.