Jones v. State

• Decision Date: 20 June 1894
• Citation: 103 Ala. 1,15 So. 891
• Parties: JONES v. STATE.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

15 So. 891

103 Ala. 1

JONES v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Alabama

June 20, 1894

Appeal from circuit court, Pike county; John R. Tyson, Judge.

George Jones was convicted of murder, and appeals. Reversed.

The testimony for the state tended to show that while the defendant was on one of the cars of the Alabama Midland Railway Company, at the fertilizer works in Troy, Ala., the deceased being in company with some other negroes, one of the negroes, Walter Hines by name, said, "Look yonder at the buzzards," referring to defendant; that, upon this statement by the said Hines, the defendant shot at said Hines with a Winchester rifle; that the ball from the rifle missed the said Hines, and struck Hartsfield, who was standing a short distance behind Hines, and from the effects of the shot he died instantly. The defense set up in this case was that there was no intent to shoot, on the part of the defendant prior to, and at the time of, the shooting, and that he did not know, at the time he pointed the gun at said Hines, in the direction of the deceased, that it was loaded. The testimony for the defendant tended to substantiate this defense. One of the witnesses introduced for the defendant testified that he was on the train that was going to Troy the morning of the shooting, and that one Friday Morrison, who sat opposite him in the coach, had the Winchester rifle with which the shooting was afterwards done. That said Morrison went to sleep, and the gun fell down. That the witness called to Gerge Jones, the defendant, and told him about the rifle falling down, whereupon the defendant replied that there was no danger in it; that it was not loaded. The solicitor objected to this testimony of the witness Alexander, and moved to exclude it. The court sustained the objection excluded the testimony, and the defendant duly excepted. This is the only ruling of the trial court which is reviewed on this appeal.

D. A Baker, for appellant.

Wm. L Martin, Atty. Gen., for the State.

PER CURIAM.

We are of opinion that the declaration of the prisoner to the witness Alexander that the gun was not loaded, and there was no danger in it, was admissible in evidence, and should not have been excluded from the jury. The degree of the guilt of the prisoner depended on the inquiry whether, at the time of the homicide, he believed the gun was unloaded, and the reasonableness of the belief. The declaration was uttered a few hours...