Jackson v. State
| Decision Date | 01 April 1918 |
| Docket Number | 268 |
| Citation | 202 S.W. 683,133 Ark. 321 |
| Parties | JACKSON v. STATE |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
Appeal from Ouachita Circuit Court; C. W. Smith, Judge; reversed.
Judgment reversed and cause remanded.
J. W Warren, for appellant.
1. No premeditation or malice is proven.
2. The question of self-defense was not submitted to the jury, and there was error in the court's instructions 6 and 7.
John D Arbuckle, Attorney General, and T. W. Campbell, Assistant for appellee.
1. The evidence is sufficient to prove malice and premeditation. Kirby's Digest, § 1764; 92 Ark. 120; 100 Id. 330; 86 Id. 160.
2. There is no error in instructions 6 and 7. The objections were general and they state the law. 95 Ark. 107; 73 Id. 320. No special request for further instructions was made. 102 Id. 588; 86 Id. 456; 75 Id. 373; 77 Id. 455.
Appellant was indicted, tried and convicted of murder in the first degree in the Ouachita circuit court for killing Lillie Mitchell, from which judgment of conviction an appeal has been prosecuted to this court.
It is contended by appellant that there is no evidence in the record showing three necessary elements of murder in the first degree: Malice, premeditation and deliberation. The substance of the evidence is as follows: Appellant had lived with Classie Specks as his wife since sometime in 1914. They frequently ceased to live together, for only short periods. She was a step-daughter of Tom Dennis, with whom she was residing in Reader a short time before the killing. She had possession of appellant's personal belongings. A short time prior to the killing, appellant visited Classie and remained in the home of Dennis for about two days. He procured a house and made his arrangements to go into the restaurant business with Classie. He went back to the Dennis home with a view to moving his things over to the house he had gotten. Dennis objected to his moving the things, which resulted in a general quarrel and an assault on appellant by Dennis. During the difficulty, Dennis got his gun and threatened to kill appellant, but some one took the gun away from him and put it in the loft of Lillie Mitchell's house, next door to the Dennis house. Appellant then left but returned to the Mitchell house that night and heard Dennis say what he would do to appellant if he came there again. Appellant thereupon decided to fix himself when he went back again, and borrowed a gun to take with him. He then arranged, on the next day, by note, with Lillie Mitchell, who lived next door to Dennis, to meet Classie at her house on the next morning after Dennis and the others had gone to work. In accordance with the arrangement, he went to the Mitchell house, and, in keeping with his plan to go "fixed," he took the borrowed gun. He first went to the Dennis, and then to the Mitchell house.
Classie Specks testified that when she went over to Lillie Mitchell's house, Lillie put her in a closet before appellant got there; that she heard Lillie tell John Jackson not to come in and then heard a gun shoot.
J. N. Wilson, who found appellant hiding in a thicket in the afternoon after the killing and arrested him, testified that appellant told him that the negroes were trying to ruin his home and that he wanted to kill old Tom Dennis, his wife, Classie and any other dam negro that fooled with him.
E. P. Ellis testified that appellant stated to him that Lillie Mitchell came to the door and told him not to come in, and that he got back with his gun and shot her; and also stated that he never gave white people any trouble, but that he was "hell among the negroes."
Appellant testified as follows concerning the immediate occurrence: He also testified that he had been told that Lillie Mitchell had it in for him on account of what he had said to her sister about her and Tom Dennis. He was asked the following question, and gave the following answer thereto:
There was evidence tending to show that an unbreached gun was lying near the door in the same room where deceased was found.
The evidence indicated and the jury might well have found that appellant approached the Dennis and Mitchell homes with a deliberate intention to kill any negro that interfered with his plan to see Classie and get his things. It is admitted that Lillie Mitchell thwarted his plan and that he killed her. The premeditation and deliberation to do murder may be formulated in the assailant's mind upon the instant. It does not have to exist in the mind an appreciable length of time. All that is necessary is for it to exist when the assailant commits the act. Rosemond v. State, 86 Ark. 160, 110 S.W. 229; Ferguson v. State, 92 Ark. 120, 122 S.W. 236; Gilchrist v. State, 100 Ark. 330, 140 S.W. 260. If the jury accepted the statement of appellant to Ellis as the true statement concerning the killing, then appellant assailed and killed Lillie Mitchell on slight, if any, provocation, or under circumstances which manifested an abandoned and wicked disposition. The following question was propounded to, and the following answer given, by Ellis:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Morrin
...p. 7.36 Hammil v. People (1961), 145 Colo. 577, 361 P.2d 117; Caldwell v. State (1919), 203 Ala. 412, 84 So. 272; Jackson v. State (1918), 133 Ark. 321, 202 S.W. 683.37 See authorities cited in fn. 11.38 It should be emphasized that a number of jurisdictions, in addition to Michigan, reject......
-
Hornsby v. State
...There is present all the essential elements of murder in the first degree. 92 Ark. 120; 51 Ark. 189; 68 Ark. 572, 576; 119 Ark. 85, 92; 133 Ark. 321, 324; 101 Ark. 448. 2. No objection was made to the testimony to the effect that, the next morning after the killing, blood, which appeared to......
-
Nail v. State
...law in conformity with numerous holdings of this Court, going as far back as 1869. McAdams v. State, 25 Ark. 405. See also Jackson v. State, 133 Ark. 321, 202 S.W. 683; Jenkins v. State, 222 Ark. 511, 261 S.W.2d 784. As to that part of the objection relating to the failure to include a refe......
-
Thomerson v. Lockhart
...to exist when the assailant commits the act.' " Shipman v. State, 252 Ark. 285, 478 S.W.2d 421, 422 (1972) (quoting Jackson v. State, 133 Ark. 321, 202 S.W. 683, 684 (1918)). Thomerson argues the State presented no evidence to show premeditation and deliberation. In fact, he argues the evid......