Jones v. State

• Decision Date: 10 July 1922
• Docket Number: 22193
• Citation: 92 So. 586,129 Miss. 457
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court
• Parties: JONES v. STATE

92 So. 586

129 Miss. 457

JONES v. STATE

No. 22193

Supreme Court of Mississippi

July 10, 1922

APPEAL from circuit court of Jones county, HON. R. S. HALL, Judge.

Val Jones was convicted of murder, and he appeals. Affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

H. B Collins, for appellant.

We say that the court erred in refusing the two instructions asked for by the defendant, appellant here, on the question of manslaughter or in refusing any and all instructions on the question of manslaughter. The court in refusing these instructions stated to counsel for the defendant that the evidence would not warrant any instruction shown on pages 15 and 16 of the record. We say the court erred, for we think there is ample evidence in the record to warrant the jury in finding that the appellant fired the shot in the heat of passion and not because of any premeditated design to kill the deceased, and if there is a conflict in the testimony then the question should have been submitted to the jury.

Mr Chief Justice SHAW in discussing the question of manslaughter says: "Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of another without malice, and may be either voluntary, as when the act is committed with a real design and purpose to kill, but through the violence of sudden passion, occasioned by some great provocation, which in tenderness for the frailty of human nature, the law considers sufficient to palliate the offense." 13 R. C. L., section 88.

Again in discussing passion as an element of manslaughter Ruling Case Law uses the following language: "Nor is this passion limited to rage, anger, or resentment: It may be the emotion expressed by the terms fear, terror, and according to some decisions excitement or nervousness." 13 R. C. L., sec. 91, page 786.

Again in the same section: "The existence and sufficiency of passion, whether it arose from adequate provocation, and whether it rendered the slayer's mind incapable of cool reflection, and whether it furnished the incentive to his action, are all questions for the jury in a case in which they arise."

So we say that if there is any evidence that would tend to show that the killing was done in a heat of passion, then it should be submitted to the jury under proper instructions on the question of manslaughter.

Again Ruling Case Law, section 92, page 787 says: "In determining whether the act which caused death was impelled by heat of passion or by malice, the surrounding circumstances and conditions are to be taken into consideration. The time elapsing between the provocation and the killing, the manner of killing, the character of the instrument or weapon, whether deadly or otherwise, a repetition of blows, and all of the attendant facts and circumstances are to be considered. Nor is the slayer's mental state to be determined solely by what takes place at the time of the killing. Reference is to be had to the previous relations of the parties, indignities and insults given on other occasions, circumstances pointing to preparation, and the like."

In other words the above seems to convey the idea that a man who had been repeatedly insulted and suffered repeated indignities at the hands of another would not be as hard to insult and his excited passion so hard to arouse as it would be at the hands of one who had never insulted him or heaped indignities upon him, and that a man who had been repeatedly threatened and put in fear by another would not be as hard to put in fear by this same person as he would if the party had never threatened him or put him in fear. Hence, the law is that all the surrounding circumstances are to be considered in determining whether there are any elements of passion shown in the testimony.

Now here is a man who had been informed that another man had attacked his wife on three different occasions, tried to force her to have improper relations with him, and when she refused, he threatened to kill her and her husband. On numerous occasions he had heard this man threaten to take his life, and one time this man had drawn his knife on him and threatened to cut his throat: As he left the house on the night of the shooting he heard this man say that he would kill him when he returned, and heard another man making preparations to secure a gun to use on him. When he returned and entered the room where he, this man and a number of others had been gambling, he found them all scattered. Instantly this man appeared in front of him with a pistol in his hand and applied a vile epithet to him; he heard a gun snap in an adjoining room. If such a condition and such surroundings are not enough to excite a man of ordinary intelligence, and to place his mind in such a state of excitement and fear as to cause him in the excitement to do violence to his apparent antagonist, then pray tell me what it would take to excite a man to such an extent that his actions could be said to have been done "in a heat of passion?" Why it occurs to us that this is enough to completely dethrone judgment and reason and to drive a man for the moment into utter insanity, let alone drive him to such a state of mind as might be construed as "in a heat of passion."

Hence we say that from a careful consideration of...