Hampton v. State

• Decision Date: 01 January 1876
• Citation: 45 Tex. 154
• Court: Texas Supreme Court
• Parties: SOLOMON HAMPTON v. THE STATE.

45 Tex. 154

SOLOMON HAMPTON

v.THE STATE.

Supreme Court of Texas.

1876.

APPEAL from Austin. Tried below before the Hon. Livingston Lindsay.

Henry Shackelford was killed by a shot fired from Solomon Hampton's house, at night, where he and Hezekiah Hampton were. Shackelford and another had accompanied the sheriff to Hampton's house to arrest Hezekiah, an escaped penitentiary convict. Hezekiah had threatened to kill any one who should attempt to rearrest him. The testimony did not disclose who fired the shot. The circumstances indicated that Solomon Hampton's gun was used. The wives of both Solomon and Hezekiah were also in the house. Being indicted for murder, on the trial the court charged the jury, in conclusion:

“If the jury believe from the evidence, at the time of the killing of Henry Shackelford, that he, the said Shackelford, was engaged with C. Langhammer, the sheriff of the county, in the lawful attempt to recapture Hezekiah Hampton, an escaped convict from the penitentiary, who was then and there present in the house, and that defendants knew and understood that the purpose of the sheriff was to retake the said Hezekiah Hampton, and they, the said defendants, resisted the capture, and in making such resistance the said Henry Shackelford was killed by one or more gunshots from the house in which the prisoners were, they are guilty of murder in the first degree, no matter by which party the shot or shots were fired. If they mutually agreed to make such resistance, and the death of Henry Shackelford resulted from such resistance, they are equally guilty, and liable to the same punishment by law.

If the jury have a reasonable doubt, from all the evidence, that the defendants had previously determined to resist the recapture of Hezekiah Hampton, or a reasonable doubt about the said Henry Shackelford being killed by a shot from the house in which they were, and that one or the other of them made the fatal shot by agreement or consent of the other at the time of the killing, then they would be required by the law to acquit; but such reasonable doubt must arise out of the evidence itself.”

The defendant, Solomon Hampton, asked the court to charge the jury--

(3) “If, after hearing all the evidence, the jury believe that the death of Henry Shackelford may have been caused by any other person than Solomon Hampton, then you will acquit him.

(4) Where several defendants are tried together, the jury may convict such of the defendants as they deem guilty, and acquit others.

(5) Where the jury, on the trial of several defendants, agree to a verdict as to one or more, and cannot agree as to others, they may find a verdict as to those in regard to whom they agree.”

The above clause of the charge given to the jury, and the refusal of the third, fourth, and fifth of charges asked, set forth above, were assigned as error on appeal.

On the trial, Esther Hampton, wife of Solomon, testified for her husband, that other men were in the house besides defendants; and on cross-examination by the State, she was asked as to her testimony on the examination before the committing magistrate, and answered that she had then testified that no other man was in the house. The ruling of the court allowing such cross-examination was also objected to.M. C. Kleberg, for appellant.

George Clark, Attorney General, for the State.

REEVES, ASSOCIATE JUSTICE.

The appellant was jointly indicted with Hezekiah Hampton for the murder of Henry Shackelford.

The jury found both defendants guilty of murder in the first degree, and assessed their punishment at confinement in the penitentiary for life.

Solomon Hampton alone moved for a new trial, which being overruled, he has appealed.

It appears from the evidence that Hezekiah Hampton was a convict from the penitentiary, but employed on the plantation of W. D. Fields, in Fort Bend county, at...