The Guthrie daily leader. [volume] (Guthrie, Okla.) 1893-1996, 1909-01-15

prevent lhe admission OF q statemen
as dying declaration
2. The accused will not be heard /,
complain that evidence offered IN sun
port OF a dying declaration wae hear,
BY the couyt IN the absence OF the iur,
when such absence was requested By
the accused.
&. The G urt IN o Prosecution fal
homicide. In which dying declaration
arc sought t0 be introduced IN evi
dence, will not presume in the absence
OF evidence that man who has been
Injured though seriously must neces
saflly feel lhat he Is about 10 die, and
on such presumption admit bis declar.
atisn.
Z Il II error for the trial court 10
admit IN evidence as 4 dylag declara-
tlon. paper writing Ia the following
words and ilgeres: Mr. r, A. Cox
came from Curnlsh a0oul o'clock Il.
m. Saturday the nth II June. 1905.
walked out Ia front Of the hotel and
was talking to Mas Emma Martin. and
telling her he was tired Of this and
asked her to tell D. s. Huffman he
wanted to drop this, about tiIs time
J. Nj Billion stepped out OF his place
Of business and said he was tired Ut
too, and called him a son OF 4 blch,
raised his slx.shooter aud fired. the
BAN striking me IN the breast had
no gun at all, made no attempt 10
hurt him at an, but told him 10 20 away
and let me aloiie. | am q the opinion
I am not going 70 get weIli" unless
competent evidence independent OF
such declaration Is Offered IN support
thereof, showing thar at the time said
declaration was made the deelafant
had given up All hope Of recovery
s. When dying declarations are Of
iered In evidence It becomes The dulJ
OF the lridl court TO first determine
whotther the declarant WAS III exhom.
IS, and whether ne had lost an hope d
recovery at the time the declaration
was made; and n such declaration is
admitted as g mDelont 4 rs then fot
the jury to pass upon tg credibllty
o. The accused IN q murder cas-
having pni In evidence BIS gFnral renu
lalon ais u peaccahle law.ahlding cil
zen IN the community where Ne resides
e Is error for ~ trial con'rtl INSTRUCT
The jury, than Il the evidence independ
en- Of the testimony n reference e
character Is found u be evenly hnl
anced, then evidence OF character
would be sufficient to turn the sea
IN favor Of the accused.
10. In d criminal case, n the eyi
lenao Is equally balanced The accused
Is entitled TO q verdict Of acQuiltal
II. The trial court ought 10 eonfln2
COUNSEL strictly within tAe facts of the
,ase. and II counsel pefslslcntly 20 out.
ilde OF the rec ri IN their argument o.
to the Jury, then the court
'h0uld punish them; and II they should /
biain thclr verdict BY this means. then |
be court should set such verdict aside
u. When the prosecuting attorney |
.oes outside ol the record and makes
mpr per remarks calculated % pfelu /
lice the rights Of the accused. Il is tho
Iuty Of counsel OF the accused tlI
romptly lnterpuse an objection to such 4
cmafls, and move the court to with
raw them from The G nsidurailou oi
be- fury and instruct the jury not 10
onsldar such remarks IN ,hls case
! this court believes tAa, Tie femafks
+ The county attorney complained Of
laterIally aided in bringing about the
erdict we VIII sot the verdict aside
b account of such remarks