Costley v. State

Grason, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. Two exceptions were taken to the rulings of the Court below, by which, evidence, proposed to be introduced by the appellant, was excluded from the jury. He offered to prove by the widow ,of the deceased, that her husband was jealous of her, and had charged her with being too intimate with men other than the appellant, and at the time of making said offer, the appellant stated that he would follow up that proof with evidence tending to prove ■ that the killing, for which he was indicted, was the result of a quarrel between the deceased and himself, caused by the former having charged the latter with being too intimate with his wife. The State’s attorney objected to evidence of the deceased’s jealousy of other men than the prisoner, being given, and the Court sustained the objection; and hence the first exception.

By this ruling, it was only the fact that the deceased was jealous of other men than the prisoner that was excluded. And this fact, thus excluded, was inadmissible whether considered by itself, or in con ¹⁷⁷ nection with the proof, with which it was proposed to be followed up. The issue to be tried, was whether the appellant had hilled the deceased with malice aforethought, and the fact that the party killed was jealous of other men than the appellant, was wholly immaterial to that issue. Even admitting that the deceased was jealous of other men, that fact could furnish no evidence that he had quarrelled with the appellant about the latter’s intimacy with his wife ; nor did it tend to explain, or throw any light upon, the facts and circumstances connected with the killing of the deceased.

The evidence, sought to he introduced, did not tend to