Jones v. State

• Decision Date: 11 June 1903
• Citation: 137 Ala. 12,34 So. 681
• Parties: JONES v. STATE.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

34 So. 681

137 Ala. 12

JONES v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Alabama

June 11, 1903

Appeal from Criminal Court, Jefferson County; Saml. E. Greene Judge.

Albert Jones was convicted of murder, and appeals. Affirmed.

The indictment charged that, before the finding of the indictment, the defendant "unlawfully and with malice aforethought killed Walter L. Cotton, by cutting him with a knife, or by stabbing him with a knife." On the trial of the case it was proved by a practicing physician that he was called to see the deceased, and he found him dead when he arrived at the scene; that, upon examining the deceased, he found two incised wounds--one in his head, between his eyes and the other inside of the thigh, which severed a large artery. This witness further testified that either wound, in his opinion, would have caused death. Austin Stinson, a witness for the state, testified that the killing of the deceased by the defendant occurred in the Atlantic & Pacific Tea Store, in Birmingham; that he (the witness) was in the store at the time; that some words passed between the deceased and the defendant, when he heard a scuffle, and Cotton, the deceased, fell, and the defendant fell on top of him; that the defendant then got up and ran out of the door that, upon going to the deceased, he saw a wound in the head and in the thigh; that blood was spouting from the latter wound, and Cotton died in about 15 minutes. This witness further testified that the defendant owned a Barlow knife but that he did not see it in defendant's possession that day or the day before; that on the day previous he did see defendant with the knife; that some days before the killing he had borrowed the knife from the defendant; that he saw the knife exhibited on the preliminary trial, and it was the one he had seen the defendant with. The defendant objected to this testimony of the witness Stinson, and moved to exclude it, on the ground that it was illegal and incompetent. The court overruled the objection, and the defendant duly excepted. One Will Patton, a witness for the state testified: That he was the officer who arrested the defendant a short time after the killing of deceased. That he made no threats or inducements to the defendant to get him to make a statement, but asked him what was the trouble with Cotton. Thereupon the defendant said that, after some words between them, Cotton struck him with his fist, and he (the defendant) went to cutting him, and cut him two or three times. The defendant objected to the witness testifying to the statements as made to him by defendant, upon the ground that the statements were made by the defendant to an officer while under arrest and under duress. The court overruled the objection, and to this ruling the defendant excepted. The witness Patton further testified that the defendant admitted that the knife introduced on the preliminary trial belonged to him. To this statement of the witness the defendant objected, and moved the court to exclude the same, on the ground that it was irrelevant, illegal, and incompetent. The court overruled the objection and motion, and to this ruling the defendant duly excepted. In his oral charge to the jury the court, among other things, instructed them as follows: "That while the defendant was charged with killing Walter Cotton, the deceased, with a knife, that, if the killing was done with an instrument of like kind (that is, a cutting instrument), this allegation of the indictment would be sustained." The defendant separately excepted to this portion of the court's oral charge, and also separately excepted to the court's refusal to give the following charges requested by him: "(1) If the jury believe the evidence in this case, they must find the defendant not guilty. (2) I charge you, gentlemen, that, from the evidence produced in this case, the defendant is not guilty of murder. (3) If the jury believe the evidence in this cause, they cannot find the defendant guilty of murder in the first degree. (4) Unless the evidence shows to the...