Lynn v. People
Decision Date | 22 December 1897 |
Parties | LYNN v. PEOPLE. |
Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Error to circuit court, Massac county.
Phillip Lynn was convicted of murder, and be brings error. Reversed.
James C. Courtney (Benjamin O. Jones and Robert Nuckolls, of counsel), for plaintiff in error.
E. C. Akin, Atty. Gen. (D. C. Hagle, C. A. Hill, D. W. Helm, and Saw. yer & Evans, of counsel), for the People.
At the November term, 1896, of the circuit court of Massac county, plaintiff in error was convicted of the crime of murder, and sentenced to the penitentiary for 16 years. From this conviction he has sued out a writ of error. It appears from the record that plaintiff in error was marshal of the village of Brooklyn, in Massac county. On the 2d day of May, the day the shooting took place, plaintiff in error had borrowed a gun, and had been shooting unmuzzled dogs, by order of the mayor. Milas Bradshaw, known among his companions as ‘Lightning Bug,’ was a negro, unmarried, but lived with a woman called Jennie Williams. In the afternoon of said second day of May, Bradshaw and four others, colored persons, two or three being women, were engaged in playing cards in the room of one Ora Shaw, which was back of a restaurant. An alley led from the street, on the east side of the restaurant, to the rear. A saloon adjoined the restaurant on the west, and in the rear of the two buildings was a yard in which the shooting took place. About 5 o'clock in the afternoon, when the plaintiff in error was in the vicinity of the saloon, a disturbance occurred between Bradshaw and his mistress, Jennie Williams; and ‘a woman came screaming in the alley,’ as Solomon Grace, one of the people's witnesses, swears, ‘and told him [defendant] that Lightning Bug was whipping his wife, and Lynn [defendant] went back there.’ This testimony is undisputed. It further appears that, when the plaintiff in error reached the rear of the buildings, Bradshaw and the other negroes were in the yard. Ora Shaw, another of the people's witnesses, swears ‘that Jennie and Bug were in a kind of dispute, and Mr. Lynn [the marshal] walks up and demands peace. Says: Says: ‘If you do it any more, I will run you in.’' The woman Jennie Williams was there. Her eyes were blackened from a blow, but it is denied that Bradshaw did it that day. It appears that Bradshaw became angry, got up, and commenced cursing the marshal, and started into the saloon, saying, as Solomon Grace swears, ‘No G-d d-n white son of a b-h could do anything with him; he would go home and get his gun;’ and he passed out of the front door of the saloon. In a few minutes the negro Bradshaw returned to the back yard, where the marshal was, and again commenced swearing at him. Solomon Grace says Bradshaw was standing in front of Ora Shaw's door, about 5 or 6 feet from the building, when he got there. Lynn was standing in the middle of the yard, about 30 feet from Bradshaw. Had his gun up to his shoulder, and was kind of backing and going sideways, and told him not to make a step towards him or he would kill him. The defendant's testimony as to what occurred at this time was as follows: His brother, Boyd Lynn, testifies that: Several witnesses were called, among them two policemen from Paducah, who testified the deceased was a dangerous man.
Under the assignments of error, plaintiff in error urges five grounds for reversal: First, the court erred in refusing to admit proper evidence on the part of the defendant; second, in giving improper instructions on the part of the people; and also in refusing proper instructions on the part of defendant; in overruling motion for a new trial; fourth, in rendering judgment on the verdict; fifth, the verdict was contrary to the law and the evidence.
Did the court err in the instructions given on behalf of the people? Or, in other words, was the law properly presented to the jury, as applied to an officer whose duty it was to prevent breaches of the peace? Section 340 of the Criminal Code (Rev. St. 1895, p. 571) provides: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Meldrum v. State
... ... (Comp. Stat., 4560; 2 ... Cyc., 35; Cooper v. Galbraith, 24 N. J. L., 219; ... Baldwin v. Flagg, 43 N. J. L., 495; People v ... Ballard, 1 Cal. App., 222; 81 P. 1040; People v ... McFarlane, 138 Cal. 481; 71 P. 568; People v ... Long, 44 Mich. 296; 6 N. W., ... State v. Phillips, 119 Iowa 652; State v ... Gosnell, 74 F. 737; Stevens v. Com., 194 Ky ... 32; 30 Ky. L. R., 200; 98 S. W., 284; Lynn v ... People, 170 Ill. 527; 48 N. E., 964; State v ... Bland, 97 N. C., 438; 2 S. E., 460; Hawkins v ... Com., 61 Am. Dec. note pp. 151, ... ...
-
Cosey v. State
...408; Johnson v. State, 75 Miss. 635; May v. State, 89 Miss. 291; Horton v. State, 120 Ga. 307; Panton v. Illinois, 114 Ill. 505; Lyon v. People, 170 Ill. 527; v. Commonwealth, 94 Ky. 391; Bush v. Commonwealth, 78 Ky. 268; Trimble v. Commonwealth, 78 Ky. 176. There is no instruction in the r......
-
Henry v. People
...upon instructions which ended thus, ‘and you should find him guilty of murder.’ Panton v. People, 114 Ill. 505, 2 N. E. 411;Lynn v. People, 170 Ill. 527, 48 N. E. 964;Steiner v. People, 187 Ill. 244, 58 N. E. 383. On a trial for murder it is not error to give an instruction embodying the st......
-
State v. White
...fly, so that they cannot be otherwise apprehended, and are upon necessity slain therein, * * * it is no felony’ "); Lynn v. People, 170 Ill. 527, 537, 48 N.E. 964 (1897) (explaining that when an officer kills a resisting suspect, the killing is justified); Jett v. State, 151 Ark. 439, 236 S......