Claypoole v. Com.
| Decision Date | 17 June 1960 |
| Citation | 87 A.L.R.2d 923,337 S.W.2d 30 |
| Parties | Harold CLAYPOOLE, Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH of Kentucky, Appellee. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky |
D. Bernard Coughlin, Maysville, for appellant.
John B. Breckinridge, Atty. Gen., Troy D. Savage, Asst. Atty. Gen., Woodson T. Wood, Commonwealth Atty., 19th Judicial Dist., Maysville, for appellee.
Appellant, Harold Claypoole, was indicted for the crime of malicious shooting at and wounding another with intent to kill. His trial resulted in a verdict or guilty and he was sentenced to five years in the penitentiary.
Appellant shot Leland Edgington in the left leg on the night of July 25, 1959. His defense was that he was acting in self-defense.
During the course of the trial the physician who treated Edgington testified concerning the nature and extent of the wound. After having so testified he was asked the following questions and made the following answers:
'Q. 15. Doctor, what is your prognosis of this man?
Objection by Mr. Coughlin.
'Judge: Overruled.
'Mr. Coughlin: Exception.
'A. For his life, I would say the prognosis is good. For the leg, we are going to have continuous trouble from the swelling in the left leg and he is going to be under treatment for that, and will have to most likely wear some sort of support, such as a rubber stocking, almost indefinitely to keep the swelling out.
'Q. 16. How long do you believe the cast will have to be on? A. Because of the shattered condition of the bone, I imagine another three months at least.
'Q. 17. Doctor, if this man has to wear this cast another three months, will he be able to follow any gainful employment?
Objection by Mr. Coughlin.
'Judge: Overruled.
'Mr. Coughlin: Exception.
'A. No manual labor only something with his hands or mental.
'Q. 18. What in your opinion will be the earliest date that this man can go back to manual labor, assuming that everything goes along as you anticipate and successfully?
Objection by Mr. Coughlin.
'Judge: Overruled.
'Mr. Coughlin: Exception.
We have held that testimony of a physician which shows the character and extent of an injury is not objectionable, on the ground that such information tends to throw light upon the question of whether the injury was inflicted with intent to kill. Riggs v. Commonwealth, 33 S.W. 413, 17 Ky.Law Rep. 1015; Williams v. Commonwealth, 229 Ky. 580, 17 S.W.2d 706; Damron v. Commonwealth, Ky., 313 S.W.2d 854. A necessary element of the crime charged herein is that the act must have been done with the intent to kill. Testimony tending to establish that fact consequently is admissible. It is obvious that the seriousness of an injury will in some instances persuasively indicate whether the injury was inflicted with the intent to kill, or whether it was inflicted with some other basic motive. Except for that purpose there is no reason to introduce testimony concerning the extent of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Eubanks v. Stengel
...(Ky.1997) (citing Davidson v. Commonwealth, 340 S.W.2d 243 (Ky.1960); Wilson v. Commonwealth, 601 S.W.2d 280 (Ky.1980); Claypoole v. Commonwealth, 337 S.W.2d 30 (Ky.1960)); see also Smith v. Commonwealth, 737 S.W.2d 683, 688 (Ky. Plaintiff's testimony clearly indicates that they lack the co......
-
State v. Wilson
...Kilcullen, 281 App.Div. 760, 117 N.Y.S.2d 880 (1953).5 People v. Wilson, 400 Ill. 461, 81 N.E.2d 211 (1948).6 Claypoole v. Commonwealth, 337 S.W.2d 30, 87 A.L.R.2d 923 (Ky.1960).7 People v. Crocker, 25 Ill.2d 52, 183 N.E.2d 161 (1962). In this case defendant was accused only of raping A. At......
-
Lawson v. Com.
...212 (citing Davidson v. Commonwealth, Ky., 340 S.W.2d 243 (1960); Wilson v. Commonwealth, Ky., 601 S.W.2d 280 (1980); Claypoole v. Commonwealth, Ky., 337 S.W.2d 30 (1960)). 37. See Partin v. Commonwealth, Ky., 918 S.W.2d 219, 224 (1996); Byrd v. Commonwealth, Ky., 825 S.W.2d 272, 276 (1992)......
-
Hudson v. State, 3 Div. 384
...v. State, 29 Ala.App. 73, 191 So. 919, approved admissibility of a bullet being still in the victim's body.In Claypoole v. Commonwealth, (Ky.) 337 S.W.2d 30, 87 A.L.R.2d 923, the Court of Appeals seemingly overruled Gambrell v. Commonwealth, 282 Ky. 620, 139 S.W.2d 454. In Claypoole reversi......