Skip to main content

Taylor v. Commonwealth

Citations

  • 90 Va. 109
  • 17 S.E. 812
  • 1893 Va. LEXIS 20

Syllabus

<p>1. Homicide — Grand Jury — Foreman—Objection that grand jury was not constituted, and foreman not selected and sworn, as required by law, cannot be raised for first time in the appellate court, but must be by plea in abatement.</p> <p>2. Venire Facias — Record.—It appearing that the venire was issuedby order of the trial court, held, no error that it is not made part of the record.</p> <p>3. Evidence — Previous Assault. —On trial for murder, testimony that about three weeks before the homicide the bed of the deceased was fired into, held, admissible, where prisoner several times mentioned the firing in a manner indicating he had done it himself, or procured it to be done.</p> <p>4. Idem' — Uncommunicated Threats. — Though after the homicide prisoner absconded, the exclusion of uncommunicated threats against him, held, not error.</p> <p>6.Idem — Rumor—Flight.-—General talk in the community that if certain persons found prisoner they would kill him without attempting to arrest him, held, inadmissible on trial for murder to rebut the fact of his immediate flight and concealment and endeavor to leave the State.</p> <p>6. Idem — Indictment against Another. — It is not error to exclude as evidence an indictment against another person for the same offence.</p> <p>7. Verdict — Affidavits of Jurors. — The affidavits or declarations of jurors showing that they acted on evidence other than that adduced before them at the trial, cannot be used to impeach the verdict.</p> <p>8. Misconduct oe Jury. — Upon trial for murder, cartridge hulls found at the scene of the homicide have been introduced by the prosecution, and prisoner’s Winchester rifle, with shells fired from it during the trial, has been introduced by him to show that the plunger struck the shells differently from those introduced by the prosecution ; and the jury were permitted, without objection, to take the rifle and shells to their room; held, it was not misconduct in the jury to take it apart and examine the plu

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • where trial judge, with parties’ consent, agreed to send gun to jury room and did not provide any further instruction as to how they should examine it, “[t]he jury had the right to take the gun apart” to inspect if it had been tampered with

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Eauntleroy, Niohardson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

20 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

1 case in this archive is cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

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.