New York Criminal Reports (Volume 15); Reports of Cases Decided in All Courts of the State of New York Involving Questions of Criminal Law and Practice with Notes and References (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos, missing text or index. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. 1902. Not illustrated. Excerpt: ... proof. He was told that he must die, and he stated that he knew he must die of these wounds, and thereupon made the ante mortem statement. This comes within the rule justifying the receipt of such statements in evidence in this class of cases. But the defendant questions this judgment as well upon the facts as upon the law, and here, to our mind, is found the problem most difficult of solution. The Court of Appeals has settled the law which is to guide us in our review of the evidence received upon the trial. If the conviction be that of murder in the first degree, the appeal is direct to that court. In People v. Fish, 125 N. Y. 136, 145, the opinion reads: " In the case of People v. Cignarale, supra, Andrews, J., said: 'It is a cardinal principle in our jurisprudence that the jury is the ultimate tribunal for the investigation and determination of questions of fact. It is no more the province of an appellate court than of the court of original instance to determine controverted questions of fact arising upon conflicting evidence. Neither can lawfully usurp the appropriate function of the jury, and neither can substitute its own judgment for that of the jury where the facts are reasonably capable of diverse or opposing inferences. '" In People v. Sliney, 137 N. Y. 570, the court says: " Great as is the responsibility imposed upon this court by the statute in capital cases, its extent does not require of us any other duty than to examine the record and from it to ascertain whether the accused has had a fair trial and that there was competent evidence from which the jury could justly find the accused guilty of the crime charged." In People v. Taylor, 138 N. Y. 398, the rule is stated thus: "If, in the judgment of this court, there was a rational doubt of the guilt...