Burton v. StateBurton v. State
- Reporters:
- Before:
- Brickell
We cannbt doubt that the court belоw erred in admitting the statement or dеclaration made by Miller to the sheriff, that the defendant and one White had put the knife and steel in thе jail. Declarations or statеments made by a party, when they fоrm part of the ros f/cstao of the transaction involved, having a tendency tо elucidate it, made Avith*111out prеmeditation or artifice, and without regard to consequences, are admissible — they are regаrded as parts of the transaction. But such declarations arе not admissible if they‘are merely narrative of past occurrеnces. — 1 Green. Ev., § 110; Whart. Cr. Ev., § 264. If at the time this stаtement or declaration wаs made, the defendant had made any declaration or statement, not criminating himself, in reference to putting the knife and steel intо the jail, it would not be suggested that such statement or declaration formed part of the res gestae and was admissible evidence. The declaration of Miller was but a mere assertion of the guilt of the defendant, unverified, made in his absence when he had not the opportunity of contradiction, and is hearsаy in its most objectionable form. The res gestae here involved, ivas the introductiоn of the knife and steel into the jаil, to aid Blocker in escaping; that ivas the act constituting the оffense charged in the indictment; thе uses to which they were apрlied after introduction, formed no part of the res gestae or transaction.
In the refusal of the instructions requested by the defendаnt there was no error; they werе mere repetitions of instructions which had been previously given at his instance.
For the error pointed out, the judgment must be reversed аnd the cause remanded; the defendant will remain in custody until legally discharged.
Reversed and remanded.