People v. Gregory

Criminad Law—Homicide—Conspibacy to Mubdbb—Abbbst of Deceased— .Sufficiency of Cibcdmstantiad Evidence.—The evidence reviewed and held sufficient, though circumstantial, to show a conspiracy to murder the deceased, to which the defendant and his codefendants and others were parties; that the killing was in consummation of the conspiracy; that the arrest of the deceased upon a criminal charge was not in good faith, but a mere pretense, and an act done in direct furtherance of the scheme and conspiracy to murder, and to sustain a verdict of guilty of murder against the defendant.

Id.—Evidence—Decdabations of Conspirators.—The declarations of persons whom the evidence sufficiently tends to show were co-conspirators with the defendant to kill the deceased, though made in the absence of the defendant, and during an interval of three or four months prior to the homicide, were admissible to show the inception and creation of the conspiracy, and that the taking off of the deceased as a common enemy occupied the minds of the conspirators, and to show conversations among them as to the means to be used, and the parties to participate in the killing; and the declarations of one who was admitted by the defendant to be his friend, who would aid him in case the deceased was killed, tending to show him to Be a fellow conspirator, and to have desired the killing of the deceased and another person, were admissible, in connection with the evidence of the defendant’s statement.

In.—Declaration as to Acts of Conspirators—Harmless Ruling.—Where there is no dispute as to the fact that seven men named had just left' a certain house and proceeded in the direction of the homicide, evidence of the declaration of a codefendant that the seven men seen in the distance were the seven men who had just left that house, giving the same names, could do the defendant no harm.

In.—Statements of Witness Mabe after Killing—Interest and Reeling of Witness.—The interest and feeling of a witness are always material • elements to be considered by the jury in weighing his testimony; and evidence of * statements made by a witness for the defendant, after the killing, tending to show, his interest and feeling is competent for that purpose.

In—Refusal to Permit Additional Counsel—Disqualification of Judge— Discretion.—Where the defendant was represented by two counsel, and after the impanelment of one-half of the jury, application was made to enroll a relative of the judge as an additional third attorney for him, whose admission for that purpose would disqualify the judge, and result in a continuance of the cause and a discharge of the jurors selected, the granting or refusal of such application was in the discretion of the court, and where the court declared the application to be in bad faith, and refused to grant it, its refusal will not De disturbed on appeal; and though it might have been better practice to have announced the decision without the presence of the jury, yet where nothing was said or done by the court upon which to predicate error, its action will not be disturbed merely because it was announced in open court and in the presence of the jury.