Appleton v. State

• Decision Date: 25 January 1896
• Citation: 33 S.W. 1066
• Parties: APPLETON v. STATE.
• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

33 S.W. 1066

APPLETON v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Arkansas.

January 25, 1896.

Error to circuit court, Pulaski county; Robert J. Sea, Judge.

Fisher Appleton was indicted and tried for the murder of one Louis Richardson. Richardson was a deputy constable, and had in his possession a warrant for the arrest of Appleton on a charge of grand larceny. At the time he was shot, Richardson was attempting to execute this warrant. The defendant claimed that the killing was done in self-defense. He testified that Richardson, without provocation, shot at him, and that, to protect himself, he fired upon and killed Richardson. The jury returned a verdict of guilty of murder in the second degree, and assessed the punishment at 21 years' imprisonment in the state penitentiary. Affirmed.

R. D. Campbell and F. T. Vaughan, for appellant. E. B. Kinsworthy, Atty. Gen., for the State.

RIDDICK, J. (after stating the facts).

We do not discover any error, either in giving or refusing instructions, that would justify us in reversing the judgment of the circuit court. Although Richardson attempted to make the arrest without first informing the appellant of the warrant and the intention to arrest him, yet this did not justify the defendant in shooting the officer. The testimony of the appellant himself shows that he knew that Richardson had a warrant for him, and that his purpose was to arrest him. He should therefore have submitted to the arrest. Appellant testified that he intended to do this, but that Richardson, without attempting to arrest him, commenced at once, and without provocation, to shoot at him, and that, to protect himself, he returned the shot and killed Richardson. If this testimony was true, the killing was justifiable; for one may defend himself against the wrongful assault of an officer, as well as against the assault of a person who is not an officer. But this question was fairly submitted to the jury, and their finding was against appellant. There was evidence amply sufficient to support the verdict, and we cannot disturb it.

During the progress of the conflict which resulted in the death of Richardson, there were several shots fired by the appellant, and two shots fired either by Richardson or his assistant, Simms. A witness was allowed to testify that while these shots were being fired the wife of appellant, who was present, called to witness "to come there and not let Fish shoot any more"; that she also said to appellant, "Quit, don't shoot"; that...