Mississippi Supreme Court
Marley v. State
March 15, 1915109 Miss. 717
Summary
The court reversed the murder conviction and remanded for a new trial because the trial court improperly refused a requested instruction requiring the jury to disregard a dying declaration if it found that the declaration was motivated by malice, hatred, ill will, or revenge, and improperly admitted a bystander's statement that trouble was imminent. The court otherwise held that the indictment challenge was untimely, the statement identifying Marley as the killer was a factual statement, and evidence concerning the earlier street difficulty was admissible for showing whether the meeting was intentional. The court also directed that profane language used by a third person in the earlier incident should not be admitted on retrial.
Holding
- Validity of the indictment. The indictment challenge was not well taken because the alleged defect was not raised in the trial court and was raised for the first time after conviction on appeal.
- Scope and character of the dying declaration. The objection that the statement was a conclusion rather than a statement of fact did not preserve the separate contention that the declaration was motivated by malice or revenge, and the statement identifying Marley as the killer was admissible as a statement of fact. A dying declaration must be limited to the killing and circumstances immediately attending it.
- Instruction concerning a revenge-motivated dying declaration. The trial court committed reversible error by refusing an instruction directing the jury to disregard the dying declaration if it found that the declaration was made in a revengeful frame of mind or was motivated by malice, hatred, or ill will.
- Bystander's statement before the shooting. The trial court erred by admitting testimony that a bystander said, immediately before the killing, that there was going to be trouble.
- Evidence of the prior street difficulty and related profane language. Evidence detailing the prior difficulty between Wylie and the estate employees was admissible as a circumstance bearing on whether Marley and Denton intentionally sought out Wylie rather than encountered him accidentally. The profane language used by Pope as Wylie walked away should not be admitted on retrial on the record presented.