Rankin v. Commonwealth
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 69 — INDICTMENT APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT. 1. The appellant was entitled to a new trial by reason of surprise caused by his own witness, Kenedy, testifying on the trial differently from what he had sworn to on the application for bail, and from what appellant had every reason to expect. '2. It was not his fault that the witness so testified, nor was it his fault that the witness’ intention so to do was withheld from him.
Read the full summary
Case 69 — INDICTMENT APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT. 1. The appellant was entitled to a new trial by reason of surprise caused by his own witness, Kenedy, testifying on the trial differently from what he had sworn to on the application for bail, and from what appellant had every reason to expect. '2. It was not his fault that the witness so testified, nor was it his fault that the witness’ intention so to do was withheld from him. (25 Ind., 220 27 Vt., 724: 11 Ark., 16; 23 111., 518.) 3. The jury were deprived of Cain’s evidence under oath.
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE LEWIS
DELIVERED THE OPINION OF THE COURT.
Appellant having been tried • under an indictment •charging him with the murder of Martin Cody, found .guilty and sentenced to confinement in the penitentiary for life, appeals.
The homicide occurred after nightfall, on the corner of Twelfth and Grayson streets, near to a grocery store and saloon, in the city of Louisville, and there was evidence introduced on behalf of the Commonwealth, which tended to show the offense charged was committed. - -
The first witness introduced for the defense was one ~W. A. Cain, who testified he saw the first 'part…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Hourigan v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1893
- Langford v. United StatesCourt Of Appeals Of Indian Territory · 1903
- Bradshaw v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1920