State v. Vermillion

Appellant was convicted for the murder of his father and sentenced to life imprisonment. On this appeal he alleges error in the admission of evidence concerning a life insurance policy on his father’s life taken out by appellant shortly prior to his father’s death. Appellant’s wife was beneficiary of this policy.

It is clear that had appellant been the named beneficiary, the testimony in question would be admissible to establish motive. State v. Thomas, 159 S. C. 76, 159 S. E. 169 (1930). We hold that it is not necessary to show that the defendant was the beneficiary under a policy of life…