Donald v. State
| Decision Date | 11 February 1915 |
| Docket Number | 317 |
| Citation | 67 So. 624,12 Ala.App. 61 |
| Parties | DONALD v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Coffee County; H.A. Pearce, Judge.
Joe Donald was convicted of murder in the second degree, and he appeals. Affirmed.
W.L Martin, Atty. Gen., for the State.
Evidence of the "peace proceedings" and contents of the affidavit sworn out by the defendant against the deceased some weeks prior to the killing, before a person referred to as a "Mr. McRitchie," was not admissible, and the court committed no error in sustaining the solicitor's objections to questions calling for this testimony. Such evidence was not material to the issues before the court except as proof self-serving conduct that it was not permissible to show.
The court properly refused to let the defendant prove particular acts of violence of the deceased entirely disconnected with the killing in question, for the purpose of showing the turbulent or bloodthirsty character of the deceased. It is only the general bad character of the deceased as a turbulent, bloodthirsty, revengeful, or dangerous man that is competent proof and proper evidence to explain, illustrate, or give meaning and point to the conduct of the deceased relative the issue on the defendant's plea of self-defense. Dupree v. State, 33 Ala. 380 73 Am. 422; Franklin v. State, 29 Ala. 14.
It requires no discussion to show the correctness of the court's ruling in sustaining the solicitor's objection to the question asked the defendant, when being examined as a witness in his own behalf, "And if you hadn't dodged, he [deceased] would have cut you?"
The court could not be put in error for refusing charge 1, for the reason that it invades the province of the jury and singles out for consideration a question of character, pretermitting a consideration of all the other evidence. Pate v. State, 150 Ala. 10, 43 So. 343.
Charge No. 2 is rendered meaningless and unintelligible by the use of the word "by," as that word last appears in the charge as set out, and the court might well have refused it on this account (Steele v. State, 159 Ala. 9, 48 So. 673), although the charge is otherwise faulty.
No duty rested on the court to give charge 3. It is argumentative, and invades the province of the jury. Medley v. State, 156 Ala. 78, 47 So. 218.
An examination of the transcript discloses no error requiring a reversal, and an affirmance is...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Montgomery v. State
... ... was trying to arrest deceased, he attempted to shoot witness ... with a gun. Proof of specific acts or of isolated facts ... cannot be shown in order to establish character, and for this ... reason the objections were properly sustained. Jackson v ... State, 177 Ala. 12, 59 So. 171; Donald v ... State, 12 Ala.App. 61, 67 So. 624; Franklin v ... [17 Ala.App. 471] State, 29 Ala. 14. Moreover, at ... this juncture ... [86 So. 134] ... there was no evidence of self-defense, and in the absence of ... some evidence showing or tending to show that the defendant ... acted in ... ...
-
Hall v. State
...acts, i. e. prior crimes, of the victim was illegal; and we concur. Smith v. State, 197 Ala. 193, 72 So. 316 (1916); Donald v. State, 12 Ala.App. 61, 67 So. 624 (1915). The appellant contends that an exception should be carved out of the general rule because there was illegal evidence admit......
-
Stover v. State
... ... hours prior to the difficulty and was in the nature of a ... self-serving declaration which is inadmissible. Maddox v ... State, 159 Ala. 53, 48 So. 689; Jones v. State, ... 181 Ala. 63, 61 So. 434; Turner v. State, 160 Ala ... 40, 49 So. 828; Donald v. State, 12 Ala. App. 61, 67 ... So. 624. Likewise the court was correct in its ruling as set ... out on top of page 49 of the transcript and on bottom of page ... 51 thereof, both calling for self-serving declarations ... Morgan v. State, 20 Ala. App. 331, 102 So. 236, ... certiorari denied ... ...