Cooper v. State
| Decision Date | 24 March 1902 |
| Citation | 31 So. 579,80 Miss. 175 |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
| Parties | TURNER COOPER v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI |
March 1902
FROM the circuit court of, first district, Coahoma county. HON FRANK E. LARKIN, Judge.
Cooper appellant, was indicted and tried for murder, convicted of manslaughter, and appealed to the supreme court.
The opinion sufficiently states the case.
Reversed and remanded.
D. A. Scott, for appellant.
There was no evidence of a premeditated design on the part of the accused to kill the deceased upon which the third instruction granted the state could be based, and the instruction was misleading and erroneous. It is no answer to the appellant's complaint of error in this instruction to say that he was convicted of manslaughter and not of murder, as charged, for in the absence of any premeditated design against the life of the deceased, if the jury believed the testimony going to show that the killing was in necessary self-defense, it was their duty to acquit, and they should not have been instructed to the contrary.
W. L. Easterling, assistant Attorney-General, for the state. The conduct of the accused both before and after the killing is strongly indicative of a deliberate design to take the life of the deceased.
Turner Cooper was tried in the circuit court of the first district of Coahoma county for the murder of Rich Tucker, was convicted of manslaughter, and sentenced to the penitentiary for ten years, from which judgment he appeals. According to the testimony of several witnesses the parties met in a store-house, when Cooper fired his pistol at Tucker and inflicted a wound upon him, of which he soon died, at a time when Tucker was making no demonstrations against him, and had no weapon with which to do him hurt; according to other witnesses Cooper shot and killed Tucker bye reason of an assault and battery upon him by Tucker with his fist; while still other witnesses stated that Cooper shot Tucker in defense of his person against an assault and battery upon him by Tucker with a knife.
The court instructed the jury, among other instructions, as follows: No. 3. "The court instructs the jury that if they believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant armed himself with a pistol for that purpose and went to Morgan's store and provoked a difficulty with deceased by word or action, intending to use such weapon in the difficulty...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Vance v. State
...Patterson v. State, 75 Miss. 670, 23 So. 646; Lofton v. State, 79 Miss. 723; Williams v. State, 90 Miss. 319, 43 So. 467; Cooper v. State, 80 Miss. 175, 33 So. 579; Fore v. State, 75 Miss. 727; Reed v. Y. & M. V. R. Co., 94 Miss. 639, 47 So. 670. An instruction which assumes a pivotal point......
-
Smith v. State
...theory. Herring v. State, 40 So. 230; Jones v. State, 36 So. 243; Pulpus v. State, 34 So. 2; Lopton v. State, 31 So. 720; Cooper v. State, 31 So. 579. The court erred in giving the following instruction: "The court instructs the jury for the state that malice is implied by law from the natu......
-
Lewis v. State
... ... It was ... fatal error to grant to the state an instruction which cut ... off the defendant's plea of self-defense ... Brown ... v. State, 191 So. 818; Vance v. State, 182 Miss ... 840; Williams v. State, 90 Miss. 319; Herring v ... State, 87 Miss. 628; Cooper v. State, 80 Miss ... 175; Lofton v. State, 79 Miss. 723; Patterson v ... State, 75 Miss 670 ... W. D ... Conn, Jr., Assistant Attorney-General, for appellee ... As to ... the instruction to which appellant takes exceptions, the ... theory of the state, and it is amply ... ...
-
Ellis v. Ellis
...R. R. v. Hayne, 76 Miss. 538; Easley v. R. R., 96 Miss. 396; Kneale v. Dukate, 93 Miss. 201; Johnson v. State, 124 Miss. 429; Cooper v. State, 80 Miss. 175, 80 Amer. Dec. 13 Stand. Ency. Proc. 777-776-892; 191 F. 34. It is misleading, confusing and contradictory and tends to lead the minds ......