Delk v. State

• Decision Date: 14 March 1893
• Citation: 17 S.E. 269,92 Ga. 453
• Parties: DELK v. STATE.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

17 S.E. 269

92 Ga. 453

DELK v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Georgia

March 14, 1893

Syllabus by the Court.

1. The general charge being full and fair on the subject of reasonable doubt in connection with the law of self-defense including reasonable fears, there was no error in refusing to charge: "If you have a reasonable doubt as to whether the defendant, Delk, acted, when he cut Evans, the deceased under circumstances calculated to excite the fears of a reasonable man, or whether he felt, at the time he cut Evans the deceased, and had reason to feel from the circumstances that it was necessary to cut Evans, the deceased, to save his life, limb, or person, then he would be justifiable, and you should acquit him,"--even if this request was a correct statement of the law. McDuffie v. State, 17 S.E. 105, (this term.) Nor was there any error in charging as follows: "But if you do not believe he is guilty of either [murder or voluntary manslaughter] beyond a reasonable doubt, and that this homicide was done in self-defense, then it would be your duty to find the defendant not guilty."

2. The verdict for voluntary manslaughter was amply sustained by the evidence, and there was no error in refusing to grant a new trial.

Error from superior court, Fulton county; R. H. Clark, Judge.

General Delk was indicted for murder, and found guilty of voluntary manslaughter. Defendant's motion for a new trial was overruled, and he brings error. Affirmed.

The following is the official report:

Delk was charged with the murder of Tom Evans, and was found guilty of voluntary manslaughter. His motion for new trial was overruled, and he excepted. The motion contained the grounds that the verdict was contrary to law, evidence, etc. Also that the court erred in refusing to charge the following written request: "If you have a reasonable doubt as to whether the defendant, Delk, acted, when he cut Evans, the deceased, under circumstances calculated to excite the fears of a reasonable man, or whether he felt, at the time he cut Evans, the deceased, and had reason to feel from the circumstances, that it was necessary to cut Evans, the deceased, to save his life, limb, or person, then he would be justifiable, and you should acquit him." Because the court erred in charging the following: "But if you do not believe he is guilty of either [murder or voluntary manslaughter] beyond a reasonable doubt, and that this homicide was done in...