Toliver v. State
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Evans, P. J.
1. Where the prosecution introduces testimony that the deceased was heard to have made certain exclamations at the time the mortal wound was inflicted, indicating an unprovoked assault upon him. by the accused, and his dying declaration that the accused shot him, and testimony that the accused admitted the killing, stating that he did not know “how come him to shoot him” (the deceased), a conviction does not depend entirely upon circumstantial evidence, and therefore it is not erroneous to omit an instruction on the law of circumstantial evidence. ■
2. The evidence did not authorize a charge on the law of voluntary manslaughter.
3. The "evidence warranted the verdict. The charge was explicit and comprehensive, and no reason appears for the granting of a new trial.
Judgment affirmed.
All the Justiees concur.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 5 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.