W. Haralson, Judge. Eurman Harper was convicted of manslaughter, and he appeals. Charge 6 refused to defendant is as follows : There are many reasons why dying declarations should be received and weighed with great caution: (1) They are necessarily wanting in that test of the credibility of oral testimony, cross-examination. (2) The jury are without the opportunity of observing the temper and manner of the declarant.
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Affirmed · Decided 1917-05-08
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently January 1973
20 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
¶1
This is the second appeal in this case. Harper v. State, 13 Ala. App. 47, 69 South. 302. The only matters urged in brief of the appellant by his able counsel are the refusal of charge 6 and the denial of the motion for new trial.
¶3
[2]
The testimony of the jurors, on grounds of public policy, was not admissible to impeach the verdict; and the objection to the testimony offered to. show misconduct on the part of one of the jurors was properly sustained. Montgomery v. State, 133 Ala. 508, 32 South. 261; Eufaula v. Speight, 121 Ala. 613. 25 South. 1009.
¶4
We find no error in the proceedings of the court, and the judgment is affirmed.
