State v. Viscome

Supreme Court of Vermont

State v. Viscome

63 A. 877, 78 Vt. 485, 1906 Vt. LEXIS 179

CourtSupreme Court of Vermont

DecidedMay 11, 1906

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 63 A. 877 (State v. Viscome) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Vermont primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Viscome, 63 A. 877, 78 Vt. 485, 1906 Vt. LEXIS 179 (Vt. 1906).

Pincite

Opinion

Munson, J.

The respondent having introduced evidence to show that his character was good in respect .of being peaceable, the State was permitted to' show in rebuttal what people were saying about him after the homicide in respect of his reputation in this regard before the homicide. The re-1 spondent excepted to this because the sayings were after the homicide instead of before.

This evidence was directed to the reputation borne by the respondent before the homicide. A witness to reputation must have knowledge regarding "that of which he testifies. It is true that reputation evidence is hearsay, but it is hearsay as gathered by the witness. When the witness testifies to what common speech subsequent to the event says the respondent’s reputation was before the event, it is proving hearsay by hearsay. The evidence should have been excluded.

Exceptions sustained, judgment and sentence reversed, verdict set aside, and cause remanded.

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

Munson, J.

The respondent having introduced evidence to show that his character was good in respect .of being peaceable, the State was permitted to' show in rebuttal what people were saying about him after the homicide in respect of his reputation in this regard before the homicide. The re-1 spondent excepted to this because the sayings were after the homicide instead of before.

This evidence was directed to the reputation borne by the respondent before the homicide. A witness to reputation must have knowledge regarding "that of which he testifies. It is true that reputation evidence is hearsay, but it is hearsay as gathered by the witness. When the witness testifies to what common speech subsequent to the event says the respondent’s reputation was before the event, it is proving hearsay by hearsay. The evidence should have been excluded.

Exceptions sustained, judgment and sentence reversed, verdict set aside, and cause remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

63 A. 877, 78 Vt. 485, 1906 Vt. LEXIS 179, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-viscome-vt-1906.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack