Angell v. State
| Decision Date | 01 January 1871 |
| Citation | 36 Tex. 542 |
| Parties | JOHN ANGELL v. THE STATE. |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
When a party resisting arrest attempts to kill the officer, while the latter in the line of his duty is making the arrest, but by accident kills a third person, the killing is murder. (See 1 Russell on Crimes, Sections 532, 592; Wharton's Criminal Law, Section 1031.)
APPEAL from Harrison. Tried below before the Hon. J. B. Williamson.
The facts of the case are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court.
No brief for the appellants has reached the hands of the reporter.
Wm. Alexander, Attorney-General, for the State.
That sheriffs, constables, and conservators of the peace generally, while in the lawful discharge of their official duties, are under the peculiar protection of the law, there can be no doubt. A policeman under our law is a conservator of the peace, and is entitled to the same protection in the execution of his duty as sheriffs and constables. (Russell on Crimes, Vol. I., p. 533; 2 Wharton's Criminal Law, 1031.) The rights of every citizen in the community require it, and the public peace and tranquillity demand it. It is the especial duty of all officers of that class to interpose their official authority to prevent crime of every character, and to preserve the peace of society; and the law in imposing this duty upon them has also conferred upon them the necessary authority and privileges to the full execution of their peculiar duty, and it punishes with increased severity all assaults upon such officials while in the lawful discharge of their duty, and every interference or resistance to their lawful authority. (2 Bishop's Criminal Law, 918.)
A constable or policeman is authorized to arrest a person who, in a fit of drunkenness, by loud noise, or otherwise, is disturbing the peace of society; and if in the attempt at making the arrest, the officer is resisted and killed, the killing is murder (1 Russell on Crimes, 532 and 592; Wharton's American Criminal Law, 1042; Archbold's Criminal Practice, 29); and if, in the attempt to kill the officer making the arrest, a third person is killed by accident, it is murder. (1 Russell on Crimes, 532 and 592; Wharton's American Criminal Law, 1031.) Indeed, it is laid down as a general rule, that if a man, designing to kill another, kills by mistake a third person, the killing of such third person is murder. (Wharton's American Criminal Law, 997.)
In the case at bar there is no denial that the defendant...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Buckley v. State
...State, 21 Tex. App. 69, 18 S. W. 95; McConnell v. State, 13 Tex. App. 390; McCoy v. State, 25 Tex. 33, 78 Am. Dec. 520; Angell v. State, 36 Tex. 542, 14 Am. Rep. 380; Thomas v. State, 53 Tex. Cr. R. 272, 109 S. W. 155, 126 Am. St. Rep. 786. The evidence, in our opinion, clearly raises the i......
-
State v. Green
...P. C. 309; 1 Hale, P. C. 464 and note, 465, 457; 2 Hale, P. C. 118; State v. Will, 1 Dev. & Bat. 121; Boyd v. State, 17 Ga. 194; Angell v. State, 36 Tex. 542; State v. Oliver, 2 Houst. (Del.) 585, 604. Under our statute a homicide committed in the perpetration or attempt to perpetrate any f......
-
Ross v. State
...v. Gilman, 69 Maine 163; People v. Malineux, 168 N.Y. 264; State v. Fulkerson, 61 N.C. 233; Calihan v. State, 21 Ohio St. 306; Angell v. State, 36 Tex. 542; v. Smith, Dears C. C. 559; 33 Eng. Leq. 567; Rex v. Gravis, 2nd Moody and R. 40; Whar. Hom., page 576, sec. 360, notes 1 and 2. OPINIO......
-
State v. Holcomb
...of murder. 1 Bish. Cr. Law, sec. 328 (7 Ed.); Golliher v. Commonwealth, 2 Duval (Ky.) 163; The King v. Plummer, 12 Modern R. 627; Angell v. State, 36 Tex. 542; State v. Raymond, 11 Nev. 98. (6) The instructions refused for defendant should not have been given. (7) This court will not distur......