McDaniels v. State
Decision Date | 09 February 1948 |
Docket Number | 36614. |
Citation | 33 So.2d 785,203 Miss. 239 |
Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Parties | McDANIELS v. STATE. |
J Hoy Hathorn and W. A. Strong, Jr., both of Louisville, for appellant.
Greek L. Rice, Atty. Gen., and Geo H. Ethridge Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
The appellant, Virgil McDaniels, was indicted for the murder of James Gale, and was convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to serve a term of ten years in the State penitentiary. On this appeal he assigns several grounds as error but relies for a reversal primarily on the ground that in the main all of the witnesses at the trial referred to the deceased as 'Eugene Gale' or 'Gene Gale' or 'Old Man Gale', and the instructions for the State referred to the deceased only as 'Eugene Gale'. We recognize the rule announced in the cases of Clark v. State, 100 Miss 751, 57 So. 209, 38 L.R.A.,N.S., 187 Ann.Cas.1914A, 463; Woulard v. State, 137 Miss. 808, 102 So. 781; Johnson v. State, 186 Miss. 405, 191 So. 127; and the other decisions cited in the briefs to the effect that it is necessary for the proof to show that the person killed is the same person as the one charged in the indictment to have been killed. In other words, that an accused can not be convicted of having killed an entirely different person from the one he is charged in the indictment to have killed.
However we are of the opinion that notwithstanding the fact that in the main the witnesses referred to the deceased by the names hereinbefore mentioned, instead of James Gale, the record discloses that the doctor who attended the deceased prior to his death, and testified about the wound, was asking the following questions:
(Italics ours.)
It will, therefore, be readily seen that the doctor was not asked whether he knew one of two persons mentioned, but his answers disclosed that he was referring to one and the same person. For instance, he was further asked, (Italics ours.)
Another witness was asked,
The another witness was asked, And his...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Upshaw v. State
...thereby. People v. Gormach, 302 Ill. 332, 134 N.E. 756, 29 A.L.R. 1120; Foreman v. State, 186 Miss. 529, 191 So. 657; McDaniels v. State, 203 Miss. 239, 33 So.2d 785; Bowers v. State, 145 Miss. 832, 111 So. 301. (207 Miss. at 603, 42 So.2d at In addition to the rule expressed in Hughes, ano......
-
Dooley v. State
...the proof must show that the person killed is the same person as the one charged in the indictment to have been killed. McDaniels v. State, 203 Miss. 239, 33 So.2d 785, and the cases there cited. See also 41 C.J.S. Homicide Sec. 313, pages 23-24. This important point cannot be left to conje......