TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

State v. Hickey

State of Louisiana v. Billy Hickey

State v. Hickey, 23 So. 504 (La. 1898)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Louisiana · State Highest Courts
Decided
April 18, 1898
Docket
No. 12,748
Judges
Miller
Citations
23 So. 50450 La. Ann. 6001898 La. LEXIS 518
Headnotes
The court again aflirms that testimony of threats of violence by the deceased against the accused, without proof of overt acts to carry the threats into execution, is inadmissible. Wharton’s Criminal Evidence, Sec. 757, notes; 35 An. 71; 37 An. 443, 489.
Summary
A PPEAL from the Second District Oourt for the Parish of Bossier. Watkins, J.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Miller

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

The opinion of the court was delivered by Miller, J.

This appeal is from the death sentence for murder.

We have no brief on behalf of the accused, but have, notwithstanding, examined the record to determine whether it supports the sentence.

We find a bill to the admission in evidence of an outcry of a person present when the fatal shot was fired. There was no dispute *601 whatever as to the killing of the deceased by the accused, and this outcry, merely an exclamation, naturally evoked by the shot and! implying only the undisputed fact of the shot, can have no influence-on the jury; besides, the testimony of the exclamation was brought out by the line of examination on behalf of the accused.

The other bill reserved is the exclusion of testimony to prove threats by the deceased against the accused. The statement of the court in signing the bill, is that not- only was there no overt act of hostility of the deceased to authorize the testimony of the threats, bat that the shooting was without any provocation or ground of apprehension of any hostile act by the deceased. Under our jurisprudence the court was entirely correct in excluding the testimony.

It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that the sentence of the lower court be affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list