The Montgomery advertiser., 1902-06-19
WHITE V. THE STATE.

Indictment for murder-Appeal from the
 Circuit Court of Jackson.
 l. CrEanizatfon of petit jury m capi- tal case; excusing juror no ground for uuashing venire.-The fact that one who was summoned as a regular juror Tor the week in which the defendant in capital case was tried, and whose name was on tho list served upon the defendant, was excused by the court in the organization of the regular juries for the said week and was not in attendance on the day Of the defendants trial, constitutes no ground for quashing the venire.
 q Homicide; when production Of bundle of clothing during trial without injury to defendant.--Where on a trial under an Indictment for murder, the court, at the request of the Solicitor. had a bundle of clothing found at the house of the de- fendant's co-defendant produced in court, and such bundle was laid where the jury could see 1t, but it Is not shown that the bundle was opened and its contents ex- posed to the jury; no injury resulted to the iaaefendant from such action on the part of the court.
 8. Same; admissibility of evidence Where on trial under an indictment for murder. a physician who testified that he had had considerable experience in ex- amining blood spots. and had examin ed the defendants leggins which were worn by him on the day of the homicide, it Is ( npetent for such witness to testify that tie stains found on the leggins looked ul e blood stains.
 {. Confession: when shown to be volua- tary.-Where a witness testifies that he lid not make any promises or threats to the defendant to induce him to make the ssitement, and that while the defendant was in jail he. the witness, who was county physician. while visiting a sick prisoner talked with the defendant and asked him what made him commit the crime for which he was charged. where upon the defendant proceeded to make a statement which implicated him as guilty of the crime charged, such state" nent Is shown to have been voluntarily made and is admissible in evidence: the fact that the defendant was under arrest and made the statement to the witness In answer to the question that assumed his Aguilt. not rendering such statement inad- missible as confession.
 6. Charge as to reasonable doubt.-In a criminal case. charge which instructs the jury that in order to convict they must find that there is no other possible or reasonable conclusion to be reached but that of the defendants guilt" is er- roneous and properly refused.
 T. Homicide; conspiracy; charge to the 3ury.-On a trial under an indictment Tor murder, where there was evidence tend sng to show that the defendant and an- other party acted in concert in killing the deceased. a charge which instructs the jury that mo matter how strong the cir cumstances may be in this case, If they can be reconciled with a theory that some other person did the killing charged against the defendant" the jury should acquit him, is erroneoups and properly refused.
 s. Charge relating to argument of coun- sel properly refused.-It is not error for the court to refuse to give charges hay ing no other purpose than to respond to or offset the argument made before the jury by the prosecuting officer.
 Affirmed,
 Opinion by Haralson, J.