On error to the Supreme Court, whose opinion is reported in 108 N.J.L. 12.
For the appellant, Edison Hedges.
For the state, Louis A. Repetto, prosecutor of the pleas.
The judgment under review will be affirmed, for the reasons given in the opinion of the Supreme Court, except as herein noted.
With respect to the admissibility of the dying declaration, its competency as evidence was sufficiently established by the recital therein contained, as follows: "I know that I will not live, and that my statement is my last." It is settled that such a recital in the declaration itself will justify its admission in evidence. State v. Biango, 75 N.J.L. 284, 79 Id. 523; State v. Turco, 98 Id. 61; affirmed, 99 Id. 96.
The fourth point, relating to opinion evidence by the nurse, is not supported by a proper objection at the trial, and therefore
needs no consideration. The fourth assignment of error and fourth cause for reversal show on their face that the objection was to the answer as not responsive -- an objection which may be taken only by examining counsel. State v. D'Adame, 84 N.J.L. 386. A prior objection was to an entirely different question, after it had been answered; and that is not brought before us. The fourth assignment and cause for reversal reads as follows:
"Because the court erroneously, over objection of counsel, permitted the following questions and answers:
"'In your opinion do you think that she was under the belief that she was going to die at the time she signed this statement?
"'Answer -- She that statement was read to her.
"'Mr. Hedges -- I object to the question, the answer as not being responsive.
"'The question is whether or not, in your opinion, you being the nurse in the case, you believe that this woman was under the premonition that she was going to ...