Court Opinion

ID: 9826333
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 15:45:29.719413+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:42:00.568040
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Hydrick.
I concur in the result. I think the Court erred in refusing to allow defendant’s counsel to use the diagram prepared by them in argument to the jury. It was not evidence, and it was not sought to be used as evidence. It was merely a graphic illustration of the evidence as to insanity in the defendant’s family, and in that way presented the view of the defendant’s counsel as to the force and effect of the testimony and the inference which should be deduced from it. The reason may be reached and influenced through the eye as well as the ear, and it may be done more forcefully in the former than, in the latter way in some circumstances. The denial of the right to present their argument to the jury in that way was the denial of the right to be fully heard in argument. It must not be inferred from this that this Court would infringe upon the discretion of the trial Court to prevent abuse of the privilege of legiti*402mate argument, and, standing alone, this error might not have been deemed sufficient to require reversal.
I do not agree that the statement of Dr. Mauldin to members of defendant’s family as to his sanity was competent. I think it was incompetent, and properly excluded.
I think the ruling as to Dr. Furman’s testimony was correct. He testified, without objection, that Dr. Taylor was one of the best alienists in the country. He was then asked as to his confidence in him. The answer was properly excluded. It was for the jury to decide what confidence or weight his testimony should have, without regard to Dr. Furman’s opinion as to the weight it should, have or the weight that he would give it, in the absence of any attack on Dr. Taylor’s testimony.
Mr. Chiee Justice Gary concurs.