The Birmingham age-herald., 1903-04-01
Opinions Rendered
 By Supreme Court

Goodlett vs. the State, Indictment for
 Murder. Appeal from the City Court Of
 Annlston.
 1. Homicide; Admlssahlllty of Evidence On trial under an indictment for mur- der. where witness testified that her house was short distance from the house where the deceasd was Killed, 1t is not competent for the defendant to ask such witness on eross-examlnation who came to her house with a certain named per son. not shown to have been connected with the homicide in any way. immediate ly after the killing; the evidence calling for such question having no pertinence to any issue involved. and being irrele- want and immateriel.
 z Same; same-On a trial under an in- dletment for murder, where 1t is shown that the shot which killed the deceased was fired from the outside of the house and through the wall thereof. the fact ns to whether or not the persons in the room with the deceased at the time were playing cards. is lmpertinent irrelevant and immeierial. and evidence of such facts Is il admissible.
 3. Same; Evidence of Flight of Another lnadmisslble-on a trial under an indict- nsnt for murder where the evidence tending te show the commission Of the homicide by the defendant Is entirely cir cumstantial, it is not competent for the dcfcadont to show that certain named othei person left the neighborhood Of the homicide a very short time after the killing
 Same; Same-Tn such case. before there Is any evidence introduced tending ,n any way to connect the defendant with the commission of the crime, and after one Of the witnesses for 6ae state has tes- tiled tlaat the defendant left house which was a short distance from the house of the deceased about an hour or an hour and a half before the killing, 1t IS mt competent for the defendant. Tn the absence of a statemer@ as to the fact ex- pccted to he shown, disclosing Its perti- ncney, 10 ask such witness upon his cross examination. Where did defendant say he vas going2"
 B. Sane; Same-On trial under an in- dictnert Ter murder where the evidence tending te show that the defendant com mi;tcd the homicide is entirely circum- stantal. fl is not competent for the de- fepdant tD intrOduce In tNlueilte lht hSS- ldrations of the deceased that another person had threatened her life; such evi- dence l,cing purely hearsay and inadmis- sihle.
 G. Trial in Criminal Case; Charge of Court to Jury-In the trial of criminal case, charges which instruct the jury that before they can find the defendant guilty they must be satisfied to moral cer- tainty not only that the proof Is con sistent with the guilt of the defendant but that it is wholly inconsistent with every other rational conclusion, and that unless they are so convinced by the evi- dence of defendants guilt, that they would venture to act upon that decision in matters of the highest concern and inn portance to their own interest they must find the defendant not guilty, are argu- mentative and properly refused.
 '. Same; same-In the trial of crim- inal case charge which instructs the jury "that no man should be convicted of a crime whose guilt Is in reasonable doubt. or in the slightest reasonable doubt" is misleading and properly re- fused.
 Affirmed Opinion by Tyson, J.