Grant v. State
Arkansas Supreme Court
161 S.W.3d 785 (2004)
- Written by Angela Patrick, JD
Facts
Abraham Grant (defendant) shot his mother-in-law, Rosetta Pittman, several times and Pittman’s niece once. Grant then fled out a back door. A police officer found Pittman in a pool of blood by the back door with wounds in her neck, chest, and hand. Pittman was lying on the ground and crying, with blood coming out of her mouth as she slipped in and out of consciousness. The officer leaned in close to Pittman and heard her say that Abraham Grant had shot her and fled out the back door. Pittman later died. Grant was tried for Pittman’s homicide. At trial, the officer testified that Pittman knew she had lost a lot of blood, but the officer could not say for certain that Pittman knew she was dying. The trial court ruled that Pittman’s statement that Grant had shot her was admissible as a dying declaration, and the officer then testified about hearing this statement. Grant was convicted and appealed. On appeal, Grant claimed that Pittman’s statement was not admissible as a dying declaration because there was only speculation about whether Pittman actually believed she was dying when she made the statement.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Dickey, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
