Mayfield v. State
| Decision Date | 21 January 1899 |
| Citation | 49 S.W. 742,101 Tenn. 673 |
| Parties | MAYFIELD v. STATE. |
| Court | Tennessee Supreme Court |
Error to criminal court, Davidson county; A. H. Munford, Judge.
Joe Mayfield was convicted of voluntary manslaughter, and brings error. Reversed.
A. J Caldwell and Judge Quarles, for plaintiff in error.
R Vaughn, Matt Allen, and Jeff. McCarn, for the State.
The plaintiff in error was indicted in the criminal court of Davidson county for the murder of one James Barnes. The record discloses that deceased had married a sister of the prisoner, Joe Mayfield, and that the latter had been invited by deceased to stay at his house during his absence in Williamson county. On the evening of the tragedy, deceased returned from Williamson county accompanied by George Mayfield, father-in-law of deceased and father of the prisoner, Joe Mayfield. Deceased had been drinking some,--had taken one, or probably two, drinks of apple brandy,--but was not intoxicated. When the wagon was stopped in front of the house, deceased and his father-in-law, George Mayfield proceeded to unload a lot of cobs, which they had brought from the country for the purpose of burning in the kitchen stove. About this time the prisoner came out of the house and walked towards the wagon, when he was accosted by deceased with the remark, "Jo, you must get another boarding house." An altercation then ensued, and insulting language was used. The state's witnesses testify that the prisoner applied a most opprobrious epithet to deceased whereupon the latter got out of the wagon, and started towards the prisoner with a cob in his hand. The prisoner thereupon picked up a stone, and threw it at deceased, striking him in the temple, and felling him to the ground. This occurred about 4 o'clock in the afternoon, and that night, about 9 o'clock, Barnes died from the effect of the wound.
It was suggested in argument that no medical expert testified that the death resulted from the wound, and that on this account the proof is insufficient to warrant a conviction. The proof is that up to the time the deceased received this wound he was in good health, and able to engage in his usual occupation. It is not suggested in proof that he died from any other cause, or that his death could have been superinduced by any other cause. We held in the case of Lemons v. State, 97 Tenn. 560, 37 S.W. 552, a capital case, that it is not essential that the state should, in a murder trial, prove by expert testimony that the death resulted from the wound, when there is no suggestion of death from any other cause, and the deceased was shown to have been of previous good health, and that he received proper medical treatment. It is shown in this case that deceased was struck on the left side of the head, just above the ear, and that the wound produced a dent in the head. We gather from the record that the temporal bone, which is the thinnest bone in the skull, was probably fractured or indented. The deceased soon became unconscious. He was treated by competent physicians, who were called in to see him, and died at 9 o'clock. We have no doubt, on the record, that deceased died from the effect of the blow delivered by the defendant.
It was next objected that the court erred in excluding the declarations of deceased made 30 minutes after the difficulty. This testimony was not offered as dying declarations. It was an effort to prove by the widow of deceased that 30 minutes after the difficulty deceased said, if he could have gotten to accused, he would have cut his heart out; using an oath, and brandishing a clasp knife, which he usually carried. These statements were not a part of the res gestæ, nor dying declarations, but mere hearsay, which were properly excluded by the court.
A more serious question arises upon the judgment entry in the case. It recites that "the jury find the defendant guilty of voluntary manslaughter, and assess his punishment at one...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jenkins v. State
...for the offense of which the defendant is found guilty is a nullity. Daniels v. State, 176 Tenn. 181, 140 S.W.2d 148; Mayfield v. State, 101 Tenn. 673, 49 S.W. 742; Murphy v. State, 47 Tenn. 516. Patently, therefore, the court could not accept the jury's verdict fixing punishment at five ye......
-
State v. Cole, 259
...Ky. 477, 148 S.W.2d 343; People v. Jackzo, 206 Mich. 183, 172 N.W. 557; Franklin v. State, 180 Tenn. 41, 171 S.W.2d 281; Mayfield v. State, 101 Tenn. 673, 49 S.W. 742; Lemons v. State, 97 Tenn. 560, 37 S.W. 552; McMillian v. State, 73 Tex.Cr.R. 343, 165 S.W. 576; State v. Bozovich, 145 Wash......
-
Corlew v. State
...guilty of the offense to which the imprisonment fixed applied, but the proof applied to a lower grade of the same offense. So, in Mayfield v. State, supra, where the found the defendant guilty of voluntary manslaughter, but fixed his term of imprisonment at one year only, a term below the t......
-
State v. Hamlin
...Railway and Light Co. v. State, 144 Tenn. 446, 234 S.W. 327 (1921); Wilson v. State, 103 Tenn. 87, 52 S.W. 869 (1899); Mayfield v. State, 101 Tenn. 673, 49 S.W. 742 (1899); State v. Ragsdale, 78 Tenn. (10 Lea) 671 (1882); Murphy v. State, 47 Tenn. (7 Cold) 516 (1870); Johnson v. State, 580 ......