State v. . McKinney
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This was an indictment for murder, tried at the May Term, 1892, of Robeson Superior Court, before Boykin, J. The defendant offered to prove by a witness that he had made diligent inquiry of persons at the place of shooting and could find no one who had loaned him a pistol. Excluded. Defendant excepted. The State was allowed, after exception, to corroborate two witnesses by showing the statements they made shortly after the homicide, and the other facts appear in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Clark, J.:
The first exception is without merit. The excluded evidence was neither competent nor relevant. It might be called, possibly, “ negative hearsay,” for lack of a better word — that is, the offer was to show that the prisoner could find no hearsay evidence that anyone had loaned the prisoner a pistol. It would not have been competent to show that there was or was not such a report. It was competent for the State to show that a pistol was loaned the prisoner by a certain person just before the homicide, as it did, and it was competent for the prisoner to negative that fact, but not to…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Lowe v. . ElliottSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
- State v. . ByersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1888
- Taylor v. . PlummerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
- Roberts v. . RobertsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1880
- State v. . JonesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1885
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Sparf v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- State v. McPhailWashington Supreme Court · 1905
- State v. MaultsbySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1902
- State v. WisemanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
- State v. BrownSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1958
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.