Eatman v. State

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
Citation169 Miss. 295,153 So. 381
Decision Date05 March 1934
Docket Number31145
PartiesEATMAN v. STATE

Division B

1. CRIMINAL LAW.

Test of criminal responsibility is ability of accused, at time he committed act, to realize and appreciate nature and quality thereof.

2. CRIMINAL LAW.

Defense of irresistible or uncontrollable impulse to commit offense is unavailable unless such impulse springs from mental disease existing to such degree as to overwhelm reason judgment, and conscience.

3. CRIMINAL LAW.

Refusing to submit to jury issue of insanity of defendant accused of burglary held not error, where only evidence that accused did not distinguish right and wrong was long-continued and persistent commission of wrong.

HON WM. A. ALCORN, Judge.

APPEAL from circuit court of Coahoma county, HON. WM. A. ALCORN Judge.

Roland W. Eatman was convicted of burglary, and he appeals. Affirmed.

Affirmed.

W. W. Venable, of Clarksdale, and C. B. Cameron, of Meridian, for appellant.

The right of trial by jury involves the right to have the jury to pass on the facts, and particularly and peculiarly is this true in a criminal case.

Burt v. State, 72 Miss. 408; Miller v. State, 35 So. 690; Molphus v. State, 124 Miss. 584.

If the weight and sufficiency of evidence is for the jury and not for the court it follows necessarily that if there be any evidence which if believed by the jury would be rationally probative of the issue, it should be submitted to the jury for its decision.

Carter v. State, 140 Miss. 265; Hampton v. State, 99 Miss. 176; Coleman v. Adair, 75 Miss. 660; New Or., etc., R. R. Co. v. Jackson, 140 Miss. 375; Gulf, etc., R. R. Co. v. Prime, 118 Miss. 90; New Or., etc., R. R. Co. v. Penton, 135 Miss. 571; New Or., etc., R. R. v. Martin, 140 Miss. 410; Gidley v. State, 97 So. 170; Traylor v. State, 101 So. 532; Gosa v. State, 108 So. 75.

Under the rule that the courts must take as true all evidence favorable to insanity in passing on the propriety of peremptory instructions, the court would have to take as true the finding the the chancery court of Lauderdale county that defendant was crazy at that time, in 1927. It would have to take as true the finding of the three physicians in Louisiana in 1930 and 1931 that his judgment was so impaired that he could not distinguish between right and wrong. It would have to take as true the finding of the Jackson authorities that all of his reasoning and judgment was impaired and that he could not tell and did not know why a normal person would not do the things that he did. The court would have to take it as true that the blows on the head may have affected his brain.

The record of the inquisition of lunacy or insanity is competent to go to the jury, and the weight of such evidence is for the jury.

McCully v. State, 131 Ark. 450, 217 S.W. 453.

The existence of and the extent of insanity is a question of fact for the jury to determine from the evidence.

Morgan v. State, 130 N.E. 528, 190 Ind. 411; Commonwealth v. Wiggins, 173 S.W. 946, 165 Ky. 73.

Whether a defendant was incapable of committing a murder on conflicting evidence was a question purely for the jury.

Belcher v. Commonwealth, 177 S.W. 455, Ann. Cas. 1917B, 238.

Whether a defendant is insane at the time of the commission of a crime is for the jury.

State v. McIntosh, 68 So. 104, 136 La. 1000; Larson v. State, 137 N.W. 894, 92 Neb. 24; Adair v. State, 118 P. 416, 44 L. R. A. (N. S.) 119; Oborn v. State, 143 Wis. 249, 31 L. R. A. 966.

W. D. Conn, Jr., Assistant Attorney-General, for the state.

Where the defense is insanity, total or partial, the test of the defendant's criminal responsibility is his ability, at the time he committed the act, to realize and appreciate the nature and quality thereof--his ability to distinguish right and wrong.

Smith v. State, 95 Miss. 786, 49 So. 945, 27 L. R. A. (N. S.) 461, Ann. Cas. 1912A 23; Grissom v. State, 62 Miss. 169.

If irresistible impulse has been declared by our court to be no defense to crime, and the only affect of the evidence introduced is to the effect that the crime committed in this case was the result of an irresistible impulse, then it was proper for the trial court to exclude all of this testimony, for the reason that it was all irrelevant and immaterial and it could not have the effect of creating any issue for the jury.

Garner v. State, 112 Miss. 317, 73 So. 50.

The only inference that can be drawn from all the testimony relating to Eatman's condition is that Eatman knows the difference between right and wrong and is capable of knowing and appreciating the nature and quality of his acts, but that he is the victim of irresistible impulses.

OPINION

Griffith, J.

Appellant was indicted in Coahoma county for burglary, and upon his trial was convicted and sentenced to the penitentiary for ten years. After his arrest and pending trial, a petition for a writ of habeas corpus was filed seeking to have the accused returned to the East Mississippi Insane Hospital. From an adverse judgment on that petition, an appeal was taken to this court, which resulted in an affirmance, Dr. M. J. L. Hoye, Supt., v. State, 169 Miss. 111, 152 So. 644. The opinion there states most of the facts bearing upon the question now before us.

In response to the indictment appellant interposed the plea, among others, that, at the time of the commission of the offense charged, he was insane. At the close of all the evidence on this and the other issues the trial judge instructed the jury to disregard all the testimony offered with reference to the insanity of the accused, and the present appeal raises the sole question whether that issue should have been submitted to the jury.

Every lay witness, except one, having had ample opportunities to closely observe the accused during the last year, was without doubt of his sanity. Two witnesses were introduced who spoke of some peculiarities in the conduct of the accused noted on isolated occasions, but even these two witnesses would not commit themselves to the conclusion that the accused was actually insane. Peculiarities of conduct on occasions do not amount to proof of insanity, else, in the judgment of many men, most of the people, other than themselves, would be insane. Every expert witness introduced or whose written report admitted in evidence, based upon a personal examination shown to have been taken in connection with a detailed personal history of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
22 cases
  • Pullen v. State
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • May 11, 1936
    ...test or not of sanity is whether the accused is able to distinguish between right and wrong. The last case so stating was Eatman v. State, 169 Miss. 295, 153 So. 381. think that there was no error in the giving of the instruction or in modifying the given instruction for the defendant in th......
  • Billiot v. State, 54960
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • June 6, 1984
    ...and conscience, in which case, as the court adds, the accused would be unable to distinguish the right and wrong of a matter. 169 Miss. at 299, 153 So. at 381. Herron v. State, 287 So.2d 759, 765 (Miss.1974). See also, Eatman v. State, 169 Miss. 295, 299, 153 So. 381, 381 (1934); Smith v. S......
  • Harvey v. State, 44669
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • February 19, 1968
    ...is the best way. Kearney v. State, 68 Miss. 233, 8 So. 292 (1890); Thomas v. State, 71 Miss. 345, 15 So. 237 (1893); Eatman v. State, 169 Miss. 295, 153 So. 381 (1934); Cunningham v. State, 56 Miss. 269 (1879); Grissom v. State, 62 Miss. 167 (1884); Bishop v. State, 96 Miss. 846, 52 So. 21 ......
  • Wilson v. State
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • March 26, 1962
    ...of the party's life is relevant to the issue and admissible in evidence', citing authorities. The same rule was applied in Eatman v. State, 169 Miss. 295, 153 So. 381; Hand v. State, 190 Miss. 314, 200 So. 258; Hinton v. State, 209 Miss. 608, 45 So.2d 805, 46 So.2d 445, appeal dismissed and......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT