Case ID: cal_3/html/0106-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Heydenfeldt, Justice,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

THE PEOPLE, Respondents, v. JUAN NAVIS, Appellant.
    In a trial for murder, where the admission or confession of the party was resorted to as evidence, it was held to be error to exclude any portion of it, made at the same time with that portion of it which was admitted.
    Appeal from the District Court of the Fifth Judicial District for Calaveras County.
    The defendant was indicted for murder, at the February Term of Calaveras County, for killing an Indian, found guilty, and sentenced to be hung.
    A witness was called for the People, in the course of the trial, who, on his direct examination, swore that “the defendant came to him on the evening that the Indian was killed, with a knife in his hand, and stated that he had killed the Indian.”
    On the cross-examination of the witness, he was asked the question, “What also did he, the defendant,say at that time?” To which question the counsel for the People objected, and the question was overruled by the court. The defendant’s counsel excepted.
    This appeal was taken from the judgment and sentence as above stated.
    
      Yale and Perley, for appellants.
    The confession of defendant must be taken together. 1 Phil. Evid. 398-9; 1 vol. Notes, p. 342, note 214; p. 343, Ib.; 1 vol. Notes, p. 421, note 252; 1 Greenl. Ev. 214; see 218, and authorities; 9 Leigh, 671; Pick. 308; 1 Dali. 240; lb. 392.
   Heydenfeldt, Justice,

delivered the opinion of the court. Wells, Justice, concurred.

Where the admission or confession of a party is resorted to as evidence, it is error to exclude any portion of it made at the same time as the part which is related.

For this reason, the judgment is reversed, and a new trial ordered.