People v. Giancoli

Belcher, C. C. The defendant was convicted of manslaughter, and sentenced to serve a term of four years in the state prison. He moved for a new trial, and has appealed from the judgment and order denying his motion.

The homicide was committed on the twenty-second day of May, 1887, in Mendocino County. Immediately after its commission defendant fled and was arrested two days afterwards, while traveling down the coast in Sonoma County.

It is not claimed that the evidence was insufficient to justify the verdict, but it is insisted that several erroneous rulings were made by the court, which necessitate a reversal of the judgment.

After a careful examination of the record, we fail to see that any such errors were committed as will justify a reversal.

1. The remark of the court that “ flight is an evidence of guilt ” was made to counsel in explanation of the ruling admitting evidence of defendant’s flight, and was followed by the statement: “The court does not intimate at all that he is guilty, or that there is any evidence of guilt, but if there should be evidence of guilt, this might be given in evidence.” The jury were afterwards correctly instructed as to the purpose and effect of evidence of flight, and we are therefore unable to see how they could have been misled by the remark complained of.

2. The answer of the witness who arrested defendant, that “ I started to arrest him for murder, which I supposed it was,” was given in explanation of the arrest, and not to prove the commission of the crime. The [644]witness did not pretend to know anything about the facts of the case, and told only why he pursued, and when and where he arrested defendant. His supposition, therefore, as to the nature of the offense, could not, and evidently did not, influence the jury in making up their verdict, which,- as we have seen, was only for manslaughter.

3. Upon the subject of flight the court, at the request of the district attorney, instructed the jury as follows: —

“The flight of a person suspected or charged with a crime is a circumstance to be weighed by the jury, as tending in some degree to prove a consciousness of guilt, and if you find from the evidence that the defendant fled from the scene of the homicide after its commission, and was captured some two days afterwards at a distance of twenty miles from the place where the killing occurred, I charge you that this is a circumstance to be considered by you in arriving at a verdict.”