The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1916-10-12
D. A. VALENTINE,
Clerk Supreme Court
No. 20,437

No. 20437
The State of Kansas, Appellee,
VS..
George r. Allen, Appellant.
Appeal from Meade County.
AFFIRMED.
Syllabus BY the Court. Porter. J.
l. In a prosecution for murder the de-
Tense was justifiable homicide. The de-
PENDANTS daughter, young woman under
seventeen years of age, testified that she
met the deceased by appointment at a
and had been talking to him for about an
hour previous to the homicide; that at the
instant her father fired the shot which
buggy and deceased was standing on the
ground beside her with arm about
her neck and the other about her ankles
attempting to drag her from the buggy
and to commit criminal assault upon her.
She further testified that more than year
previous to the homicide when deceased
where she lived, he had once criminally
assaulted her and at another time had at
formed her father of these occurrences,
Ind that deceased was discharged from
her fathers employ, that she bitterly hated
the deceased because of his treatment of
her and never had wanted to see him
again and would not have wanted to speak
to him If she had met him. Held. that for
the purpose of affecting the credibility of
the witness, it was not error to admit in
evidence letters written by her to the
ploy. containing expressions of friendship
and affection and tending strongly to i'm
peach her testimony as to the relations be-
tween herself aud the deceased.
2 For the same reasons 1t is held that
it was proper to admit in cross examina-
ton written statement signed by the
same witness in the presence of the county
attorney and others day or two after
the homicide. in which she stated that at
was standing at one side of the buggy
talking. with his left hand on the back
Of the buggy or around her shoulder and
the other hand resting on the buggy bed.
3. Where in a criminal prosecution the
court sustains the defendants challenge
to the array and discharges the panel be-
cause the original names in the jury box
have not been properly selected from the
assessment rolls, it Is the duty of the
Statutes of 1909, to select a sufficient
number of jurors for the term and to
name those selected, and it is not error to
and require them to select the lists of
jurors. (The State vs.. Schmidt, "A Kan.
T. An Information which charges that
the defendant
did then and there unlawfully, felon-
iously. willfully, deliberately, with pre-
meditation and with malice aforethought
and with a deadly weapon, to w.t. a gun,
then and there loaded with powder and
then and there with the deadly weapon
aforesaid and in the manner and with the
weapon aforesaid shoe. and kill him. the
said Alfred Tucker, contrary to the form
of the statute in such made and pro-
vided and against the peace and dignity of
Sufficiently informs the defendant that
the charge against him is murder in the
first degree, and tile omission to employ
the words purposely and n.aIiciOusIy In de-
scribing the act of shooting and killing.
is held in this not such a defect or
imperfection tends to the prejudice Of
the substantial rights of the defendant
upon the merits.
5. In this case it is held that there was
no abuse of discretion in permitting the
Enforcement of certain names Of witnesses
upon the information Immediately before
the trial.
g. In this case it is held that there was
no error in the exclusion of testimony Of
fered for the purpose Of showing the gen
erar> reputation of deceased where he
formerly resided in another state as to
his being immoral and unchaste and also
to show that he had contracted there a
common-law marriage and that a child
had been born of such marriage, informa-
ton respecting these matters not having
reached the defendant until after the homi-
eide and the facts not tending in any way
to establish a defense nor to affect the
situation or appearances at the time Of the
homicide.
Z Counsel for defendant requested the
court not to submit any instructions ex-