Lang v. State

52 So. 340, 166 Ala. 22, 1910 Ala. LEXIS 362
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided April 14, 1910·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ANDERSON, J.

The witness Clark testified that the deceased was not only conscious, but knew he was going to die, and told him that “he was killed and bound to die.” The witness did not encourage him, but told him he thought he would die. We think a sufficient predicate was laid for the admission of the dying declaration.—Clark v. The State, 105 Ala. 91, 17 South. 37, and cases cited. It is true, there was evidence, subsequently introduced by the defendant, tending to contradict Clark as to the condition of the deceased, and tending to show that he did not charge the defendant with shooting him, but this did not affect the admissibility of the evidence, but went to its credibility, and which was a question for the jury.

[24]*24Charge R, refused to the defendant, was covered by given charge B. Indeed, they are exactly alike, except for the use of the word ‘case” in one in place of the word “instance” in the other.

Charge, S refused the defendant, if not otherwise bad, was involved and confusing.

There was no error in giving the state’s requested charges.

The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Dowdell, C. J., and Simpson and Sayre, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Lang v. State, 52 So. 340, 166 Ala. 22, 1910 Ala. LEXIS 362 (Ala. 1910).

52 So. 340 (Lang v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

McMillan v. State
75 So. 824 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1917)