State v. Tawney

Citations

• 83 Kan. 603
• 112 P. 161
• 1910 Kan. LEXIS 590

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Change op Venue — Local Prejudice. The evidence warranted a finding that there existed no such prejudice in the community as would prevent the defendant from having a fair trial.</p> <p>2. -Disqualification of the Judge. Unfavorable comment by the court in denying a new trial and other adverse rulings and errors of judgment in former trials held insufficient to reverse a decision denying a change of venue.</p> <p>3. Jury and Jurors — Challenge to the Array — Misconduct of Officer Who Summoned the Jury. Mere expression of an opinion by the sheriff as to the guilt or innocence of a defendant in a criminal action held not to warrant the quashing of a panel summoned by him.</p> <p>4. CRIMINAL Law — Rulings upon the Evidence. On appeal by one convicted of larceny the appellant claimed the trial court erred in admitting and excluding testimony. Held:</p> <p>(a) It was within the discretion of the court to permit questions to be asked a witness tending to refresh His recollection.</p> <p>'(&) Testimony that certain relatives of the prosecuting witness had been convicted of crime and sentenced to the penitentiary was properly excluded.</p> <p>(c) There being testimony that a witness had been declared insane, the defendant was not prejudiced by a refusal to permit a transcript of the lunacy proceedings to be introduced.</p> <p>(d) Certain testimony was properly excluded because it. was a self-serving declaration.</p> <p>(e) Objections to questions calling for hearsay testimony were properly sustained.</p>