State v. Talbert

Citations

• 41 S.C. 526
• 19 S.E. 852
• 1894 S.C. LEXIS 128

Syllabus

<p>1. A Dying Declaration is not inadmissible because made under oath.</p> <p>2. Ibid.- — Objection— Other Grounds.- — The admission of a dying declaration being objected to upon the ground that it was under oath, the objection overruled, and exception noted, the inadmissibility of such declaration, because it also included a statement of matters that occurred some months before the homicide, cannot be considered on appeal. The ‘-exception noted” was only to the ruling of the judge upon the objection made before him.</p> <p>3. Evidence — Warrant—Opinion.—A witness for the State was properly forbidden to testify on cross-examination as to the offence charged in a warrant that he had issued as trial justice against another man, as the warrant itself was the best evidence, and, besides, would have been only the opinion of the witness, or of the affiant, as to the other man’s guilt.</p> <p>4. Ibid. — -Res Gestas. — -Testimony of a conversation between the accused and a third person at the house of the former after the homicide elsewhere committed, is not competent testimony in his behalf.</p> <p>5. Ibid. — Ibid.—Exceptions cannot be considered where based upon alleged error in rulings not shown by the record to have been made. A declaration of deceased, upon crawling into a store immediately after he was shot, is admissible in evidence against his accused murderer as part of the res gestas 1</p> <p>6. Supreme Court- — -Correction op Judgment.- — An inadvertent error in the form of the judgment of this court corrected by the clerk under direction of a subsequent order from the justices of the court.</p>