Ferguson v. State

Decision Date07 February 1907
Citation43 So. 16,149 Ala. 21
PartiesFERGUSON v. STATE.
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

Appeal from Circuit Court, St. Clair County; John Pelham. Judge.

W. F Ferguson was convicted of manslaughter in the first degree and he appeals. Affirmed.

The evidence for the state tended to show that, on the afternoon on which the killing occurred, Will Andrews and his mother were coming along the public road, approaching the store dwelling, and barn of the defendant; that before they reached the store John Ferguson, the son of the defendant in this case, who was in defendant's store, got his gun, walked out of the store and up the road towards defendant's home, passed the house, and went into the lot and into the stable; that, when Will Andrews was nearly opposite the lot gate, a shot was fired from the stable into which John Ferguson had gone, and that immediately after this shot was fired John Ferguson came out of the stable, went towards the pigpen, and when near the pigpen fired a second shot, which killed the defendant; that after killing him he came out of the lot, passed the dead man and his mother, and went to where his father was standing near the corner of the yard and on the opposite side of the road, about 75 yards from the lot, where some words passed between him and Mrs. Andrews. The evidence tended to show that, when Mrs. Andrews and Will Andrews approached the store, John Ferguson was showing some customers some shoes, and the defendant in this case was lying on a box of corn with his head towards the door talking to a witness for the state; that the witness mentioned the fact that Will Andrews and his mother were coming towards the store, and immediately thereupon John Ferguson picked up his gun and went out the door, preceding Mrs. Andrews and Will up the road; that as soon as he had passed the store this defendant got up out of the box of corn, went out, and closed the store door, whereupon the witness for the state asked him to let him go back in the store and get his hat. The defendant then opened the door and went in the store with the witness, and when he came out the second time he had a pistol in his hand, and went on up the road in the direction which his son had taken, and in the direction in which the dead man had gone. It was further shown that, owing to a rise in the road, one standing where defendant was could not see a person standing at or near the lot gate. It was further shown that the defendant went within 50 or 60 yards of where the killing occurred with his pistol in his hand, and had some conversation with the mother of the dead man. The witness Washburn testified that on Monday before the killing, which occurred on Saturday afternoon, the defendant was at witness' house, and in a conversation stated to witness that he thought he had succeeded in getting the trouble between John Ferguson, his son, and Will Andrews settled until Saturday evening, when the old man came to the store and threw off on John, and had made him mad again; that John would not talk to defendant about it now. Defendant further stated that if they pushed the thing on John, and John got into trouble, the defendant had 300 acres of land and would spend it all before John could be hurt, and that, if John were to kill one of them, no more attention would be paid to it than if he had killed a dog. The witness Tolbert testified that on Saturday afternoon, just one week before the killing he rode up to the defendant's door, whereupon the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • National Park Bank of New York v. Louisville & N.R. Co.
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • February 1, 1917
    ...Ala. 63, 32 So. 760, 92 Am.St.Rep. 17; Griffith v. State, 90 Ala. 583, 8 So. 812; Morris' Case, 146 Ala. 66, 41 So. 274; Ferguson v. State, 149 Ala. 21, 43 So. 16. The however, must be the ordinary and probable effect of the wrongful act specifically agreed on, so that the connection betwee......
  • Durden v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Appeals
    • April 11, 1922
    ...is rarely proven by positive, direct testimony; it is usually by circumstances. Morris v. State, 146 Ala. 66, 41 So. 274; Ferguson v. State, 149 Ala. 21, 43 So. 16. witness Brooks, after giving the details of the killing of deceased by members of the alleged mob, was then asked by the solic......
  • Huguley v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Appeals
    • April 11, 1912
    ... ... be introduced in evidence on the trial ... The ... court's ruling on the defendant's motion to set aside ... the verdict of the jury and grant a new trial is not ... revisable on appeal. Herndon v. State, 2 Ala. App ... 118, 56 So. 85; Ferguson v. State, 149 Ala. 21, 43 ... So. 16; Thomas v. State, 139 Ala. 80, 36 So. 734 ... Charge ... No. 10, requested in writing by the defendant and refused by ... the court, as set out in the transcript, was written in such ... a way as to make it difficult to decipher one of the words ... ...
  • Arden v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Appeals
    • December 19, 1912
    ... ... From ... what we have said, it will be seen that the court was not in ... error in refusing the other charges requested in writing by ... the defendant ... [6 ... Ala.App. 68] Th`e ruling of the court on the motion for a new ... trial is not reviewable here. Ferguson v. State, 149 ... Ala. 21, 43 So. 16; Sanders v. State, 2 Ala. App ... 13, 56 So. 69 ... We find ... no reversible error in the record ... ...
  • 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