We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
NOTES AND ABSTRACTS.
- Abstract
This article discusses issues related to criminology. While looking for means to make the conviction of the guilty more certain, we might consider one change which would be just to the defendant. I refer to the present inadmissibility of declarations of another person that he is guilty of the crime for which defendant is being tried. See People v. McLaughlin, 44 Calif. 435, 437; People v. Hall, 94 Calif. 595, 599. Such declarations should not be admissible if the person making them is available for testimony. But if due to death or insanity such person is no longer available the declarations should be admitted. They fall logically and reasonably in the exception to hearsay for declarations against interest. True that exception is confined according to the authorities to declarations against pecuniary or proprietary interest. But the interest one has to be free from punishment for crime is more obvious and compelling than perhaps any other and the guaranty of the truth of such declarations is therefore greater than of others based on lesser interests. If one in possession of land states that he has a lease on it for ten years at some rather low rental the declaration is admissible as cutting down his prima facie claim to a fee. It is admissible, moreover, to prove the tenancy.
- Subjects
CRIMINOLOGY; TRIALS (Law); CRIMINAL justice system; LEGAL procedure; PEOPLE of the State of California v. George W. Hall; CRIMINAL law; CIVIL law; CRIMES against peace
- Publication
Journal of the American Institute of Criminal Law & Criminology, 1928, Vol 19, Issue 3, p425
- ISSN
0885-4173
- Publication type
Article