The Montgomery advertiser., 1908-09-01
FOWLER V. THE STATE. s,,-Anr fT1aci1ed Hahruary 13. 1oo
RIEMIENH NaIlIm v I ~ V EllHRl lzsllH zlI

| FOWLER V. THE STATE.
 Murder.--(Decided February is, 1908. 4B South. 9i3)
 1 1. Criminal law. appeal: review
 harmless error in admission or evlushss' --The admission of testimony or | witness that she went into defendant's
 Kitchen and found some partly cooked | food on the stove, and that she put salt | in the food and fire in the stove, all
 though immaterial to any issue in the case, Ia not reversible error, as 1t ap- pears that no injury resulted to ac. cused therefrom, and If error IS cureu by Section 43s3. Code 1896.
 | g. same Vince witness had testI- | Aed that she lived from 150 to 200 yards 1 from defendants house and that when | she went there on the evening that oe- l ce ased died she found her lying on the
 bed in a cold precipitation. M Wss harmless error to allow her 70 tesuLy that iuas before she went to the house
 defendants little girl "cams 10 her
 Homicide; evidence; personal re- | iation between parties.-lt Was peI
 mtssible for a witness to tessl.y tna' | she had seen defendant whip nis w1s' s the deceased. a week oetore sne
 ss tha relation existing between de- | fendant and the injured person. when | tba offense is against the person or | nronartv Is admissible as tending 10 siSclos. . motive on defendants part, ana as aiding in identifying him as the wrong-doer.
 | Criminal law: evidence opinion --The testimony of one who aided n dressing deceased for burial, that shs and their location, was not an express | sion of opinion or conclusion or the witness. and was admissible.
 R. Same; matters explanatory or | e.ct. Ir eyidenye Where a witness | had teattifed that she visited defend- | ants house about o'clock on the eVsn- | ing before deceased died and naa tes- | tified to the condition m wnlSh ~ sn. | found deceased. it was perminsinle .ol
 tbs mother of such witness to tesufy
 that witness had left her house JusI hefore sundown on that evening
 Homicide; instruction; degree or
 .rin,e If under the evidence, the de- | fendant was either guilty or muIooI or was entitled to an acqulttai. | unnecessary to charge uP'"
 Criminal law trial. argumenta-
 tt,,a instruction.-A charge asserting | that the law makes the humane pso- p
 vision that if the jury can aocoSnt ay. | inc death of deceased from patnolosi, ic ,o causes, they must do so anu at
 defendant. Is properly rei"seo I
 Same--Charges are arsumenta- tive and properly refused wnien asseIe | tbat the humane provision Of the law ts that there should not be convic- | lion unless to a moral certainty the | o,,idence excludes every other reason . | shlo hvpothesis. than that or the gullt | of acensed. and no matter how strong tha facts may be. if they can De re l connIIed with the theory that some oth-
 ar nerson may have done the act, or
 thst deeeased may have come to her death from natural causes. then the euiIt of accused is not shown oy that
 fun measure of proof which the law
 Homicide; intent as an ingredient oI rn,rder in the second degree.-- Charges hypothesizing intent to XIII as 1 a necessary ingredient of murder Tn
 the second degree are properly refused
 as misleading.
 10. Criminal law; trial; abstract in-
 structfon.-Requested charges based upon the hypothesis that death was
 caused by a blow of a deadly weapon
 or hIow with the fist are abstract | S,,bera there was no evidence tending 1 to show the circumstances attending | the killing and the defence was thai
 deceased came to her death from nat
 ural causes. ,
 tiona.-charges are properly refused al
 arEumentattive which assert that 1t ii
 the duty of each member or the Jprs