State v. Swartz

Citations

• 108 Wash. 21
• 182 P. 953
• 1919 Wash. LEXIS 829

Syllabus

<p>Criminal Law (385)—Appeal—Necessity of Objections—Information. Objections that an information is duplicitous and too uncertain cannot be first made in the supreme court.</p> <p>Homicide (69)—Evidence—Dying Declarations—Admissibility. In a prosecution for homicide by performing an abortion, a dying declaration of the deceased on the evening of her death is admissible where it states that she consulted and was treated by the defendant, for that purpose, that defendant used a catheter and made deceased feel pretty sick, and knew what she was doing.</p> <p>Same (69). Where such declaration contains statements relating to the acts of another in no way connected with the res gestae, they should be stricken.</p> <p>Same (69). The statement that deceased heard defendant tell another over the phone what she had done is admissible not as part of the res gestae, but as an admission of the accused.</p> <p>Same (70). A dying declaration made nine days subsequent to entering a hospital and in a sense recitals of a past event is admissible. when it but describes links in the chain of criminal conduct that was not complete until death was accomplished by the illegal operation.</p> <p>Criminal Law (158)—Evidence—Experts—Hypothetical Questions. In a prosecution for homicide by performing an abortion, it is proper to allow physicians to testify, in answer to questions fairly summarizing the facts which the state’s evidence tended to prove, that the proximate cause of death was the act of the defendant in introducing a catheter into the uterus of a pregnant woman.</p> <p>Homicide (89)—Trial—Reception of Evidence—Dying Declarations. In a prosecution for homicide, the accused is entitled to display to the jury the proven signature of the deceased to a dying declaration, where it was on a sheet separate and apart from the declaration itself and could not confuse the jury.</p> <p>Criminal Law (358-1) —Homicide (127) •—New Trial — Newly Discovered Evidence—Impeachment of Witness. In a pr