Hays v. State
| Decision Date | 04 June 1917 |
| Docket Number | 22 |
| Parties | HAYS v. STATE |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
Appeal from Chicot Circuit Court; Turner Butler, Judge; affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
Jas. R Yerger and N. B. Scott, for appellant.
1. The verdict is contrary to the evidence. The evidence shows that defendant struck because of the open knife in the hands of Bradley, a knife with a two and one-half inch blade, and to prevent him from cutting his father.
2. It was error to instruct the jury on murder and voluntary manslaughter, as there was no evidence as to either crime.
3. It was error to refuse the instruction defining the right of defendant to defend his father.
4. The entire evidence shows no guilt.
John D Arbuckle, Attorney General, and T. W. Campbell, Assistant for appellee.
1. The evidence is conflicting and the verdict should not be disturbed where there is any substantial evidence to support it. 104 Ark. 162; 100 Id. 330; 103 Id. 4.
2. Where the trial court has erroneously instructed upon the higher degrees of crimes, such errors are harmless where the defendant is only convicted of the lesser degree. 59 Ark. 431; 74 Id. 431; 37 Id. 238; 22 Id. 251.
3. No instruction was requested by defendant on his right to defend his father. 95 Ark. 409; 60 Id. 613; 47 Id. 196; 45 Id. 539; 2 Id. 133.
Eugene Hays was indicted for the crime of murder in the first degree and was convicted of involuntary manslaughter, his punishment being fixed by the jury at one year in the State penitentiary. He has appealed to this court.
According to the testimony of J. B. Maxey, a witness for the State, Eugene Hays killed Levy Bradley at night at a church house in Chicot county, Arkansas, some time in the fall of 1916. George Hays, the father of Eugene Hays, and Levy Bradley had some words about whether the church should be used by a singing class or for a protracted meeting. Finally Bradley told George Hays about something that had happened in the town and he said it was a lie. George Hays walked out in front of Bradley and told him that if he did not like what he had said to get up and get on him. Bradley said: "Nobody is scared." Bradley then started to get up and Eugene Hays picked up a stick of wood and struck him. The blow rendered Bradley unconscious and he died about two o'clock that night. Bradley did not strike at Eugene Hays. When Moxey first went over to where the parties were, Bradley was whittling a pencil with a little tin knife. The knife had two blades, a small one and a large one. The small blade was open and was about two and one-half or three inches long. He had both the knife and the pencil in his left hand alongside of each other when Eugene struck him with the stick of wood. Another witness for the State testified that he took the little tin-handled knife and pencil out of Bradley's left hand while he was lying on the ground unconscious. It was also shown that Bradley was a right-handed man.
Eugene Hays testified that he suggested to Bradley to adjourn his choir to some private house so that the church might be used for the protracted meeting; that Bradley became angry at the suggestion and advanced on him with a drawn knife; that he picked up a stick of wood and struck Bradley in order to keep from being cut by Bradley. He stated that he did not intend to kill Bradley at all. His testimony was corroborated by that of another witness who has present. Still another witness testified that he thought the knife was found in Bradley's right hand. The question of the credibility of the witnesses was for the jury and the testimony of the State was legally sufficient to warrant the verdict.
Counsel for the defendant next contend that the judgment should be reversed on account of the court instructing the jury on murder and voluntary manslaughter. They insist that there was no evidence upon which to base these instructions. The evidence for the State was sufficient to warrant the jury in finding the defendant guilty of voluntary...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Champion v. Williams
... ... tract of land in that county containing forty acres. The land ... in controversy is shown to be in high state of improvement, ... and appellees and their grantors, immediate and remote, have ... been in actual possession thereof for more than fifty years, ... ...
-
Prewitt v. State
...45; Bradshaw v. State, 95 Ark. 409, 411, 129 S.W. 811; Holmes v. Bluff City Lumber Co., 97 Ark. 180, 188, 133 S.W. 819; Hays v. State, 129 Ark. 324, 196 S.W. 123; Gunter v. Williams, 137 Ark. 530, 537, S.W. 136. It also appears that the court gave no instruction on the question of the credi......
-
Henry v. State
...428. Defendant did not request an instruction on circumstantial evidence, and it is too late to complain now. 89 Ark. 300; 110 Ark. 567; 129 Ark. 324. MCCULLOCH, C. J. Defendant was convicted under an indictment charging murder in the first degree in the killing of one Aaron Dill with inten......
-
Powell v. State
...v. State, 73 Ark. 280, 83 S.W. 928; Rogers v. State, 60 Ark. 76, 29 S.W. 894; Baine v. State, 132 Ark. 416, 200 S.W. 999; Hays v. State, 129 Ark. 324, 196 S.W. 123; Tolliver v. State, 113 Ark. 142, 167 703. The indictment in the case charged appellant with the commission of the crime of rap......