Kelley v. State
| Decision Date | 08 May 1889 |
| Citation | 11 S.W. 627 |
| Parties | KELLEY <I>v.</I> STATE. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from district court, Freestone county; T. J. GIBSON, Special Judge.
Chance Kelley appeals from a conviction for manslaughter.
Asst. Atty. Gen. Davidson, for the State.
It was excepted to the charge to the jury that the instructions contained therein with regard to mutual combat were uncalled for by any evidence in the case, and were calculated to confuse and mislead the jury. From the facts we think it clear that one or the other of the parties provoked or brought on the conflict, and that the one or the other not chargeable with this acted upon real or apparent necessity, and this excludes the idea of a mutual combat. Rosborough v. State, 21 Tex. App. 672, 1 S. W. Rep. 459. There was no proposition to nor understanding between the parties that they were to fight. On the contrary, the proposition and understanding were that they were to wrestle for a sum of money, or upon a bet as to which could throw the other down. In preparing for this contest, one or the other got mad, drew his knife, and assaulted the other with it. The evidence is conflicting as to which party commenced the fight. During the fight both parties were cut with a knife. Under the facts of the case it was error to charge the law of mutual combat.
As to defendant's right of self-defense, the court charged the jury in the language of article 572 of the Penal Code, which requires a resort to all other means to prevent a threatened injury before there is a resort to homicide, in order to render it justifiable. This instruction was excepted to, and defendant's counsel requested a special instruction in lieu thereof, as follows: "If you believe from the testimony in the case that there was an unlawful attack made upon defendant by deceased, and that the attack was of such a nature that the defendant had reasonable grounds to believe that he was in immediate and impending danger of being murdered, or of receiving serious bodily injury, by his assailant, he is justifiable in killing his assailant when [if?] at the time of the killing some act has been done by the deceased showing evidently an intention to commit one of such offenses; and the defendant in such case may act promptly, without resorting to other means before killing his assailant, because in such case the law presumes the party's safety depends upon his prompt action in killing his assailant; and if you so believe from the evidence...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Maclin v. State
...S. W. 64; Orman v. State, 22 Tex. App. 604, 3 S. W. 468, 58 Am. Rep. 662; Orman v. State, 24 Tex. App. 502, 6 S. W. 544; Kelly v. State, 27 Tex. App. 566, 11 S. W. 627; Baltrip v. State, 30 Tex. App. 545, 17 S. W. 1106; Risby v. State, 17 Tex. App. 520; Cline v. State, 28 S. W. 684; McCandl......
-
Stroud v. State
...State, 20 Tex. App. 643; Williams v. State, 22 Tex. App. 497, 4 S. W. 64; Orman v. State, 24 Tex. App. 502, 6 S. W. 544; Kelly v. State, 27 Tex. App. 566, 11 S. W. 627; Baltrip v. State, 30 Tex. App. 545, 17 S. W. 1106; Cline v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 28 S. W. 684; Shumate v. State, 38 Tex. ......
-
McCandless v. State
...22 Tex. App. 604, 3 S. W. 468; Id., 24 Tex. App. 495, 6 S. W. 544; Williams v. State, 22 Tex. App. 497, 4 S. W. 64; Kelly v. State, 27 Tex. App. 562, 11 S. W. 627; Hunnicutt v. State, 20 Tex. App. 633; Fuller v. State, 30 Tex. App. 560, 17 S. W. 1108. The court gave a very full charge on th......
-
Anthony v. State
...was not raised by the facts in the case. In support of this contention, we are referred to the following authorities: Kelly v. State, 27 Tex. App. 565, 11 S. W. 627; Meuly v. State, 26 Tex. App. 274, 9 S. W. 563, 8 Am. St. Rep. 477; Everett v. State, 30 Tex. App. 682, 18 S. W. 674; Havard v......