Hardin v. State, 8 Div. 931

Citation344 So.2d 234
Decision Date29 March 1977
Docket Number8 Div. 931
PartiesWillie Edd HARDIN v. STATE.
CourtAlabama Court of Criminal Appeals

Gary L. Rigney, Huntsville, for appellant.

William J. Baxley, Atty. Gen. and David W. Clark, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

HARRIS, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of murder in the first degree, and the jury fixed his punishment at life imprisonment in the penitentiary. With counsel present at arraignment appellant pleaded not guilty. After conviction he gave notice of appeal. The trial judge determined appellant to be indigent and he was furnished a free transcript. Trial counsel was appointed to represent him on this appeal.

The sufficiency of the evidence to support the judgment of conviction is not presented to this Court. There was no motion to exclude the State's evidence; there was no request for the affirmative charge or any other written charges; there was no motion for a new trial and no exceptions were reserved to the oral charge to the jury.

The evidence presented by the State made out a clear-cut case of murder with no mitigating or extenuating circumstances. Appellant claimed self-defense stating that just before he fired the shotgun toward the deceased, he saw what appeared to be a pistol in his hands as he started to get out of his automobile when both were stopped on the road.

O. D. Fletcher, who lived in the Harvest Community of Madison County, testified that on May 9, 1976, the deceased came to his home driving his automobile. After being there for a while they decided to go and get some beer. The deceased was driving and Fletcher was in the front seat on the passenger's side and one Robert Sumners was in the back seat directly behind the deceased. On the way to get the beer, they met appellant in his automobile and he stopped and flagged the deceased down. Appellant got out of his automobile with a .20 gauge shotgun and pointed it at the head of the deceased and ordered him out of the car. The deceased refused to get out. Both Fletcher and Sumners got out and walked to the back of the car and Fletcher started pleading with appellant not to shoot the deceased. Then appellant pointed the gun at Fletcher and he stepped back out of the way. Appellant then told the deceased, 'I have been looking for you all day to kill you. I told you last night I was going to kill you when I saw you.' Again he ordered the deceased out of his car. Instead of getting out of the automobile the deceased started pulling off slowly and appellant hollered at him and told him to stop but he would not stop, and appellant ran up beside the automobile and put the gun in the window of the car and shot one time. The deceased drove on down the road to Lockhart's, some short distance away, stopped his automobile and fell out onto the parking lot of the store. Fletcher went to his home nearby to get his car to pick up the deceased to take him to the hospital. When he got back to where the deceased was lying, there were several people present and some of them had cut one of the pants legs of the deceased and had tied it around the wound to try to stop the bleeding. Fletcher was told not to move the deceased as an ambulance had been called.

While waiting on the ambulance Fletcher saw appellant drive by the store where the deceased way lying, on two occasions, but he did not stop. Fletcher remained at the scene until the ambulance came and also the police. He observed the ambulance attendants administering to the deceased inside the ambulance but he did not know what they were doing.

The police officers asked him what had occurred and he told them that appellant had shot the deceased and he went with the police to the ball park where they found appellant. He was present when the officers arrested appellant and read him his constitutional rights.

Fletcher further testified that there was no weapon of any kind in the automobile of the deceased, nor did he have a weapon on his person. He stated that no one went around the automobile driven by the deceased after he parked it at the grocery store. He stated that while appellant was ordering the deceased to get out of the car, the deceased reached over and picked up a cigarette lighter and lit a cigarette and appellant hollered at him not to pick up a gun and the deceased told appellant he did not have a gun and to please go on and let him alone.

Dr. Tom R. Key testified that he was a practicing physician in Guntersville, Alabama, but on May 9, he was working in the emergency room of the Huntsville Hospital when the deceased was brought in by the ambulance. He testified that he had been in communication with the ambulance attendants by radio and had advised them to start I.V. or saline solution en route to the hospital. He said that he first saw the deceased in the emergency room at 2:22 p.m. on May 9, 1976, and in the emergency room with him at the time was Dr. Rao Kakani, who was a vascular surgeon in Huntsville and that both of them administered treatment to the deceased but that he had lost so much blood from the time that he was shot until he reached the hospital that they were not able to save his life. He further testified that the deceased was shot in one of his legs near the knee area and that the wound was so traumatic and extensive that he would have lost his leg even if he had lived. He said that the deceased died as the direct and approximate consequence of the gunshot wound to his leg causing him to bleed to death. He said the entrance wound was on the medial aspect and the exit wound was actually behind the knee so that this whole area behind the knee in the bend of the knee was gone.

Annie Miller testified that she was an eyewitness to the shooting and stated that she lived on the road near the place where appellant stopped the deceased's car; that she heard the deceased tell the appellant that he didn't want any trouble but that she saw appellant put the shotgun inside the window of the car and fire one time, that she saw the deceased slowly drive away from the place of the scene of the shooting and saw appellant get back in his automobile and drive away.

Earl Williams testified that he was an Investigator with the Madison County Sheriff's Department and on May 9, 1976, around 1:40 p.m., he went to the scene to investigate the shooting; that he talked to O. D. Fletcher and to Robert Sumners. He stated that he checked the automobile driven by the deceased and did not find a weapon of any kind and he also checked the victim and found no weapon of any kind on his person. That O. D. Fletcher told him that appellant had gone to the ball park and he and some other officers, including Investigator Crowell, went to the ball park and arrested appellant.

Frank Crowell testified that he investigated the shooting and took several photographs of the scene of the shooting, the body of the victim and the victim's automobile, and that he found no weapons of any kind in or around the victim or in or around the victim's car; that he arrested appellant at the ball park and read him his Miranda rights from a card and asked him if he understood his rights and he answered in the affirmative by nodding his head up and down. The appellant's father was present at the time he was arrested and when the officers asked where the gun was, appella...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Young v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • November 2, 1982
    ...v. State, 376 So.2d 761, 764 (Ala.Cr.App.), reversed on other grounds, Ex parte Thompson, 376 So.2d 766 (Ala.1979); Hardin v. State, 344 So.2d 234, 238 (Ala.Cr.App.1977). Malice and intent may be inferred from the use of a pistol. Taylor v. State, 405 So.2d 946 (Ala.Cr.App.), cert. quashed,......
  • Sanders v. State, 5 Div. 522
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • November 25, 1980
    ...637, 179 So.2d 762 (1965); Coates v. State, 253 Ala. 290, 45 So.2d 35 (1950); Ex parte Bayne, 375 So.2d 1239 (Ala.1979); Hardin v. State, 344 So.2d 234 (Ala.Cr.App.1977); Brown v. State, 109 Ala. 70, 20 So. 103 In reviewing the facts and the legitimate inferences arising therefrom, we find ......
  • Hurst v. State, 3 Div. 525
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • March 7, 1978
    ...confession is voluntary, and, unless it so appears it should not be admitted. Pike v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 340 So.2d 865; Hardin v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 344 So.2d 234. Where the trial judge finds that a confession is voluntary, in a hearing outside the presence of the jury, that finding will ......
  • Hewitt v. State, 6 Div. 195
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals
    • August 19, 1980
    ...it should not be admitted. Houston v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 321 So.2d 261; Rainer v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 342 So.2d 1348; Hardin v. State, Ala.Cr.App., 344 So.2d 234. When the trial court finds on conflicting evidence that a confession or incriminating statement was voluntarily made, such find......
  • 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