State v. Sullivan
Citations
- 43 S.C. 205
- 21 S.E. 4
- 1895 S.C. LEXIS 153
Syllabus
<p>1. Opinion — Testimony—Immaterial Error. — The trial judge erred in refusing- to permit the surgeon, who made the post mortem examination of the deceased, m case of homicide, to state his opinion as to how the deceased was standing towards the pistol when the ball entered; but such testimony having been afterwards received, its exclusion in the first instance became harmless error.</p> <p>2. Homicide — Evidence.—The defendant on trial for homicide was not prejudiced by excluding from evidence the statement made to defendant by one of his children at the time that a note from deceased was delivered to defendant on the morning of the homicide.</p> <p>3. Ibid. — Ibid.—There was no error in striking out from the testimony the remark of the deceased, that defendant was not fit to live in a civilized community — such a remark not being a threat, nor necessarily showing ill feeling, and the witness otherwise testifying as to the feelings of deceased towards the prisoner.</p> <p>4. Witness — Contradiction.—Where a witness for the State is asked, on his cross-examination, whether he had not made statements contradictory to material facts just testified to by him, and he answers that he does not remember, proof of such contradictory statements may be introduced by the defendant. Mr. Chief Justice HcIver dissenting.</p> <p>5. Threats — Self-Defence.—There was no error in refusing to charge a request based upon threats by deceased which ignored the requirements, that to sustain a plea of self-defence, the jury must determine whether the circumstances were such as to justify a person of ordinary firmness in believing that he was in danger of death or serious bodily harm, and that a necessity to take life does not exist where there are other probable means of avoiding that necessity.</p> <p>6. Charging Juries.- — -There was no error in failing to charge that which was not requested.</p> <p>7. Ibid. — There was no error in refusing to charge a request which would have left the
Judges: Gaey, Gary, McIver
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
4 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
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.