Fields v. Commonwealth

• Decision Date: 25 October 1938
• Citation: Fields v. Commonwealth, 275 Ky. 136, 120 S.W.2d 1021 (Ky. Ct. App. 1938)
• Parties: FIELDS v. COMMONWEALTH.
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

120 S.W.2d 1021

275 Ky. 136

FIELDS v. COMMONWEALTH.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky

October 25, 1938

Appeal from Circuit Court, Floyd County.

Pearlie Fields was convicted of manslaughter, and she appeals.

Affirmed.

B. M James and Joe P. Tackett, both of Prestonsburg, for appellant.

Hubert Meredith, Atty. Gen., and Wm. F. Neill, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the Commonwealth.

CREAL Commissioner.

Under an indictment charging her with the murder of her husband Virgil Fields, Pearlie Fields has been convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to imprisonment for 12 years.She is appealing.

Grounds argued and relied on for reversal are (1) that the court erred in overruling appellant's motion for a peremptory instruction; (2) that the verdict is flagrantly against the weight of evidence; (3) error in permitting the introduction of incompetent evidence over appellant's objections; (4) that instruction No. 3 was prejudicially erroneous; (5) that the commonwealth's attorney in closing argument made improper and prejudicial statements to the jury.

The homicide occurred on the night of November 4, 1937.Shortly after the shooting neighbors and friends of deceased who learned that he had been shot went to his home.They found the door locked but he called to them to force the door open which they did.On entering the house they found him lying on his back at full length with the bed, near the wall against which the bed stood.The bed covers were pulled up under his arms.There was a wound in the neck from which blood was flowing profusely on the pillow and bed clothes.He was taken to a hospital at Wheelwright and in a short time removed to a hospital at Pikeville where he died a few hours later.

Doctors testified that the bullet entered the side of the neck near the base, completely severing the spinal cord; that this caused paralysis of the entire body from there down.It appears in evidence that for some time appellant and her husband had been having domestic troubles, often engaging in fights and brawls.Appellant testified that when she returned home from church she found the doors locked but her husband finally let her in; that he asked her where she had been and that she told him; that after putting her baby to bed he jumped on her, beat her and was chasing her with an ice pick when she procured a pistol from a dresser drawer and fired one shot at him when he was near the foot of the bed; that he fell back on the bed and asked her to put him in the bed which she did, pulled the covers up over him and then went for the doctor.

Physicians who treated deceased and others who accompanied him to the hospital testified to statements made by him concerning the shooting.These statements were in substance that he had gone to a trunk to look at some insurance papers and after looking them over went to bed.When his wife came in she went to another room and in a short time came back and asked him what he had been doing in the trunk.He told her he had been looking at his insurance papers and that she commenced arguing and quarreling with him and continued until he told her he was tired of the fuss and did not want to hear any more; that she then shot him.Neighbors who went in after the shooting testified that there was no evidence of a struggle in the room and no blood on the floor or elsewhere except near the pillow.Before making the statement to the doctor at the first hospital to which he was taken deceased had indicated that he entertained no hope of recovery and had been advised by the doctor that his wound was fatal.When the neighbors told him they were going to take him to the hospital he told them that it would do no good because he was getting too short of breath.Some of these parties also testified as to statements made by him concerning the shooting.

Counsel for appellant base their argument that the court should have peremptorily instructed the jury to find appellant not guilty on the ground that there was no evidence to contradict that of appellant that she was acting in her necessary self-defense when she shot her husband.The statements made by deceased as to how the shooting occurred and evidence concerning physical facts and circumstances strongly tend to indicate that the shooting occurred as he said it did and that he was lying on the bed when he was shot.Appellant stated that deceased was coming toward her and facing her when the shot was fired.But as shown the bullet entered the side of the neck.According to...