Jackson v. State
Jackson v. State
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the court.
The predicate of the dying' declarations of the deceased Williams, in this case, testified to by two or three witnesses, collated, was as follows: Tie stated, “I am going to die. I cannot live. My stomach is killing me.” This was at twelve o’clock at night, and Williams died the next day, before noon. Another witness testified that the deceased said: “Austin, I am dying. I cannot live.” Another that he said: “Uncle Will, my stomach is killing me.” The attending physician testified, quoting the words of the witness: “I told him he had only a few minutes to live. He asked me if I could do him any good at all, and I told him, ‘No that he would die in a few minutes.” We think the predicate showed a condition of mind in reference to dissolution that made the statement of facts admissible in evidence. It was then ruled by the court that the dying declaration could be admitted, and it was put in evidence before the jury, containing the statement of the facts of the occurrence, and this ruling of the court we think was right. In William’s statement to the doctor there was no detail of the facts, but he did say that the accused “killed him for nothing.” The credibility of the witnesses who testified to the declarations was for the jury.
The judgment is affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Willie Jackson v. State of Mississippi
- Cited By
- 9 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- 1. Criminal Law and Procedure. Murder. Evidence. Dying declaration. Sense of impending dissolution. The declarations of a dying man are sufficiently shown to have been made under a sense of impending dissolution to make them admissible in evidence, if otherwise competent, where it was shown that the deceased had been informed by his attending physician that there was no hope for his recovery and that he announced, when he made the declarations, that he was going to die, that he could not live and that his stomach was killing him. 2. Same. Same. Killed for nothing. A dying declaration is admissible in evidence, where otherwise competent, although it be merely the statement by the declarant that accused killed him for nothing. 3. Same. Prosecuting lawyer. Improper argument. Harmless error. A statement by the prosecuting lawyer, in argument to the jury, ■ to the effect that more murders had been'committed in the county than elsewhere in the state, and that it was high time for the juries to put a stop to them, does not constitute reversible error where upon objection the court advised the jury that it was improper and should he disregarded.