Lewis v. State
Citation | 189 S.W.2d 641,209 Ark. 51 |
Decision Date | 01 October 1945 |
Docket Number | 4391 |
Parties | Lewis v. State |
Court | Supreme Court of Arkansas |
Appeal from Craighead Circuit Court, Jonesboro District; Walter N Killough, Special Judge.
Affirmed.
Bon McCourtney and Claude B. Brinton, for appellant.
Guy E. Williams, Attorney General, and Oscar E Ellis, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Appellant was charged by information with the crime of assault with intent to kill "H. J. Bosler with a deadly weapon, to-wit: a knife." He was found guilty by the jury and his punishment fixed at one year in the state penitentiary. For reversal of the judgment, appellant alleges five grounds in his motion for a new trial. The first four questioned the sufficiency of the evidence, and the fifth alleges that "the court erred in permitting the introduction of the knife in the evidence without sufficient showing that said knife was used in the assault."
The facts when viewed in the light most favorable to the State (Cheney v. State, 205 Ark. 1049, 172 S.W.2d 427) are: At about 9:30 p. m., after attending a picture show with two ladies in the city of Jonesboro, the victim of appellant's assault, Mr. Bosler, and the two ladies got in Bosler's car. Bosler was in the rear seat, and one of the ladies was driving, when they noticed appellant driving a car on the wrong side of the street. There was another Negro in the car with appellant. Bosler testified: Appellant had his hands behind him as he advanced on Bosler.
During the encounter, appellant cut Bosler with a knife. Bosler testified:
Appellant finally got in the Bosler car and after they had reached the police station, he was searched and a white-handled knife was found in his pocket. One of the ladies testified that Mr. Bosler told appellant,
Appellant and his witnesses gave a different version of the encounter which made a disputed question of fact for the jury. The court fully instructed the jury on the law governing the case and there is no complaint as to any instructions given. In its instructions, the court...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Johnson v. State, 5701
...Cisco. We disagree. The conditions under which intent may be implied from facts and circumstances are well set out in Lewis v. State, 209 Ark. 51, 189 S.W.2d 641 (1945): While the intent to kill cannot be implied as a matter of law, it may be inferred from facts and circumstances of the ass......
-
Acuff v. State, 5755
...or the boys. The law relating to the offense of assault with intent to kill has been stated many times by this court. In Lewis v. State, 209 Ark. 51, 189 S.W.2d 641, this court 'One of our most recent cases is that of Craig v. State, 205 Ark. 1100, 172 S.W.2d 256, 257, wherein we said: 'In ......