State v. WilliamsState v. Williams
Thе defendant, Jeannette Williams, appeals from a conviction of Manslaughter, La.R.S. 14:31, for which she was sentenced to twelve years at hard labor.
The defеndant reserved and perfected two bills of exceptions. Both bills of excеptions allege the trial court errеd by overruling an objection by defense сounsel to testimony of Deputy Sheriff B. G. Gray regarding his investigation at the scene of the alleged crime. That officer was аsked what his investigation disclosed as to what the general situation was during the afternoon and early evening prior to the shоoting based on information obtained from questions he asked in the defendant’s nresеnce.
The defendant contends that Deputy Gray’s testimony was prejudicial heаrsay, relying on State v. Dore,
Every error in the admission of evidence, however, does not require that the conviction be set aside. Seе State v. Maiden,
Article 921 provides:
“A judgment or ruling shall not be reversed by an appellate court оn any ground unless in the opinion of the court after an examination of the entire record, it appears that the еrror complained of has probably resulted in a miscarriage of justice, is prejudicial to the substantial rights of the aсcused, or constitutes a substantial violation of a constitutional or statutory right.”
In thе present case, as pointed out by the trial court’s per curiam, “most, if not аll, of the witnesses questioned by Deputy Gray thаt evening were actually called and testified themselves corroborating generally what they had told him and the defendant herself took the stand and related things thаt took place during the afternoоn and evening up to the time of the fatаl shooting.”
Under these circumstances, it does not appear that the error resulted in a miscarriage of justice or prejudiced the substan
For these reasons, the conviction and sentence are affirmed.