Case ID: ky-op_4/html/0572-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Ludge Pryor :", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Doc Waring v. Commonwealth.
    Elections — Proof of Vote.
    Upon identification of one, who voted at a certain precinct, it is proper to permit the poll books to be read as evidence to the jury to show that his vote was recorded and counted.
    Same — Residence.
    The statute on “residence,” of one claiming the right to vote, is the place where the family of a married man resides, unless such residence is for a temporary purpose only. If the family is permanently at one place, and he transacts business at another, the former shall be his residence.
    APPEAL EROM GREENUP CIRCUIT COURT.
    November 7, 1871.
   Opinion oe ti-ie Court by

Ludge Pryor :

Having identified appellant as Eranklin 'Warren, who voted at the Liberty precinct in August, 1870, it was proper to permit the poll books to be read as evidence to the jury to show that his vote was recorded and counted.

But it was erroneous to instruct the jury without qualification, that the place where a married man’s family is, is his residence.

The statute on the subject of fixing the residence of an individual claiming the right to vote in a particular precinct, is that the place where the family of a married man resides shall generally be considered his residence unless the family so resides for a temporary purpose. If his family is permanently in one place and he transacted business in another, .the former shall be his residence.

Halbert, Thomas, for appellant.

The instruction under the evidence should have embraced the foregoing propositions in conformity to the statute.

1 Yol. K. S'., pp. 434-435.

For the error in the instruction, therefore, the judgment must be reversed, and the cause remanded for a new trial and for further proceedings consistent herewith.