Brown v. State

• Decision Date: 20 May 1903
• Citation: 75 S.W. 33
• Parties: BROWN v. STATE.<SMALL><SUP>*</SUP></SMALL>
• Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals

75 S.W. 33

BROWN v. STATE.^*

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 20, 1903.

Appeal from District Court, Harrison County; Richard B. Levy, Judge.

John Brown was convicted of murder in the second degree, and he appeals. Affirmed.

F. H. Prendergast, for appellant. Howard Martin, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

BROOKS, J.

Appellant was convicted of murder in the second degree, and his punishment assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for a term of 13 years.

In his motion for new trial appellant complains of the following portion of the court's charge: "Insulting words or conduct of the person killed towards the wife of the party guilty of the homicide, provided the killing take place immediately upon the happening of the insulting conduct." Appellant insists this charge was error, "because there was no question as to insulting words and conduct toward defendant, as the same would be understood by the jury, and because the law permits the husband to kill the adulterer as soon as they meet after the husband is informed of the insulting words." Paragraphs 11 and 12 of the court's charge must be considered together, and they are as follows:

"(11) By the expression `adequate cause' is meant such as would commonly produce a degree of anger, rage, sudden resentment, or terror in a person of ordinary temper sufficient to render it incapable of cool reflection. The following are deemed adequate causes: (1) Adultery of the person killed with the wife of the person guilty of the homicide, provided the killing occurred as soon as the facts of an illicit connection is discovered; (2) insulting words or conduct of the person killed towards the wife of the party guilty of the homicide, provided the killing takes place immediately upon the happening of the insulting conduct; (3) any condition or circumstance which is capable of creating, and which does create, in the mind of the person guilty of the homicide such a degree of anger, rage, sudden resentment, or terror as to render it incapable of cool reflection, is adequate cause.

"(12) Now, if you believe from the evidence in this case that defendant had heard of the adultery of Robert Washington with his wife, and that as soon as the fact of the illicit connection was discovered he shot and killed the said Robert Washington, in said county and state, about August 1, 1900, and you further find that at the time of the killing there was aroused in the mind of defendant such a degree of anger, rage, sudden resentment, or terror which rendered it incapable of cool reflection, then you will find defendant guilty of manslaughter. Or if you find from the evidence that defendant saw deceased use insulting conduct towards his wife, and that he immediately, upon the happening of the insulting conduct, shot with a gun and killed deceased at time and place mentioned in the indictment; or if he had been informed of insulting conduct of deceased towards his (defendant's) wife, and that as soon thereafter as defendant met deceased he shot with a gun and killed said deceased at time and place in indictment charged; and if you further find that at the time of the killing his mind was aroused to such a degree of anger, rage, sudden resentment, or terror as to render it incapable of cool reflection—then you will find defendant guilty of manslaughter. Or if you believe from the evidence that from any condition or circumstance which was...