Brady v. State

(After stating the foregoing facts.)

The defendant complains that the trial judge erred “in failing to instruct the jury that, to authorize a verdict of guilty in said *480case, the evidence must have connected movant with the perpetration of the offense of murder alleged against him.” The judge instructed the jury that the case was dependent upon circumstantial evidence, and that to warrant a conviction upon such evidence the proved facts must not only be consistent with the hypothesis of guilt, but must exclude every other reasonable hypothesis save that of the guilt of the accused. The specific…