Lambert v. State
| Decision Date | 02 February 1922 |
| Docket Number | 6 Div. 273. |
| Citation | 207 Ala. 190,92 So. 265 |
| Parties | LAMBERT v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County; H. P. Heflin, Judge.
Tom Lambert was convicted of murder in the first degree, and sentenced to death, and he appeals. Affirmed.
W. E. Howard and T. E. McCullough, both of Birmingham, for appellant.
Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., for the State.
The defendant was convicted of murder in the first degree, and sentenced to death.
His victim was a defenseless woman whom he killed without provocation, in her own home, by shooting her with a pistol.
The only defense offered was the insanity of the defendant, which was specially pleaded. Under that plea the burden was on the defendant, to show to the reasonable satisfaction of the jury, that, by reason of mental disease, he could not distinguish between right and wrong with respect to the act he did; or else that, through the duress of mental disease, his free agency was destroyed. Parsons v. State, 81 Ala. 577, 2 So. 854. The trial judge instructed the jury to acquit the defendant if they had a reasonable doubt of his sanity at the time of the killing-an instruction to which he was not entitled, but under which, nevertheless, the jury found against him on that issue.
There was no satisfactory evidence of exculpatory insanity as defined by the Parsons Case, and as explained to the jury by the trial judge. Conceding that the jury might have sustained the plea of insanity by virtue of permissible inferences from the evidence, they were well authorized by the evidence to find against it.
We find no prejudicial rulings on the evidence. The only insistence is that the solicitor should not have been allowed on cross-examination to ask one of defendant's insanity witnesses-a nonexpert-what weight he attached to certain details of defendant's conduct, to which he had testified, in making up his opinion, that defendant was insane. The question was of course designed to test the value of the witness' opinion, and was properly allowed within the wide discretion of the trial court in such matters.
We find nothing in the record which would justify us in reversing the judgment of conviction, and it will therefore be affirmed.
Affirmed.
All the Justices concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Manning v. State
... ... State, 81 Ala. 577, 2 ... So. 854, 60 Am.Rep. 193, and adhered to in this jurisdiction ... Wilkes v. State, 215 Ala. 428, 110 So. 908; ... Anderson v. State, 209 Ala. 36, 95 So. 171; Hall ... v. State, 208 Ala. 199, 94 So. 59; Whittle v ... State, 213 Ala. 301, 104 So. 668; Lambert v ... State, 207 Ala. 190, 92 So. 265; Umble v ... State, 207 Ala. 508, 93 So. 531 ... The ... basis for the insistence of insanity under his plea was ... merely the action of appellant just prior to and at the time ... of the homicide. This was not sufficient to bring defendant ... ...
-
Deloney v. State
...v. State, 125 Ala. 12, 27 So. 983; Jones v. State, 181 Ala. 63, 61 So. 434; Fondren v. State, 204 Ala. 451, 86 So. 71; Lambert v. State, 207 Ala. 190, 92 So. 265. In cross-examination by the solicitor of the witness Greer, for the purpose of bringing out the facts, the solicitor was permitt......
-
Stinson v. State
... ... must reasonably satisfy the jury that by reason of mental ... disease the defendant could not distinguish between right and ... wrong with respect to the act, or that through duress of such ... disease his free agency was destroyed. Lambert v ... State, 207 Ala. 190, 92 So. 265; Lide v. State, ... 133 Ala. 43, 31 So. 953. Others were argumentative, and those ... dealing with the issue presented by the plea of not guilty ... were fully covered by the oral charge of the court, and some ... of them tended to confuse the issues ... ...
-
Brodka v. State
...v. State, 209 Ala. 36, 95 So. 171; Hall v. State, 208 Ala. 199, 94 So. 59; Whittle v. State, 213 Ala. 301, 104 So. 668; Lambert v. State, 207 Ala. 190, 92 So. 265; Umble v. State, 207 Ala. 508, 93 So. 'The basis for the insistence of insanity under his plea was merely the action of appellan......