McMillan v. State
| Decision Date | 01 April 1914 |
| Parties | McMILLAN v. STATE. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Appeal from District Court, Haskell County; Jno. B. Thomas, Judge.
George McMillan was convicted of manslaughter, and he appeals. Reversed and remanded.
J. F. Cunningham, of Abilene, and Jas. Stevens, for appellant. C. E. Lane, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
From a conviction for manslaughter, this appeal is prosecuted. This is the third appeal in this case. The first is reported in 58 Tex. Cr. R. 525, 126 S. W. 875; and the second in 143 S. W. 1174. From the opinions in these former appeals the case and issues can well be understood.
Self-defense was duly raised in appellant's favor and submitted. But the court, in submitting it, gave this charge: "Upon the law of self-defense you are further instructed by the court that, if you find from the evidence that on the afternoon of May 4, 1908, the defendant was reading a newspaper in the Knox Hotel, at Knox City, Tex., and that the deceased, West, made a remark which the defendant thought was addressed to him, and that he arose and went toward deceased to learn what was said, and that the deceased looked sharply at the defendant, and the defendant stopped, and deceased commenced to whistle directly at defendant, and defendant mocked deceased, and slapped himself upon the leg, and was looking upward, and, while so doing, the deceased struck the defendant the first lick with a poker over the head, thereby causing pain and bloodshed, and such an assault on the part of the deceased brought on a combat between himself and defendant, in which the deceased used a poker, and the defendant used his fists, until defendant was wounded and blinded by the flow of blood into his face from his wounds, and dazed and sickened by the blows inflicted upon him, and in such condition was thrust back and away from deceased, and, while in such dazed and blinded condition, it appeared to defendant, viewed from his standpoint, in the light of all the facts and circumstances in evidence, that he was in danger of death or serious bodily injury at the hands of deceased, and thereupon took his knife, and therewith defended himself from an attack or threatened attack upon him by deceased, and thereby cut the deceased, and continued to cut and strike deceased until he found or believed himself out of danger, then you will acquit the defendant, and say by your verdict, not guilty." Appellant duly excepted to this charge, claiming that, by it, before they could acquit appellant on that ground, the jury were required to believe several unimportant, immaterial, and unnecessary things, which...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Minton
...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; McMillan v. State, 73 Tex.Cr. 343, 165 S.W. 576; State v. Bozovich, 145 Wash. 227, 259 P. 395. There is no proper foundation, however, for a finding by the jury as to the......
-
State v. Cole, 259
...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. 227, 259 P. The evidence in this case brings it within the rule of the Minton case. The State......
-
Jackson v. State
...to the evidence, was fully and substantially given in those of the court and those given as requested by him. He cites McMillan v. State, 73 Tex. Cr. R. 343, 165 S. W. 576, and other cases along the same line, wherein we held in effect that it was error in submitting self-defense for the co......
-
Lott v. State
...all of them before they may acquit the defendant unless the existence of all of them is requisite for an acquittal." McMillan v. State, 73 Tex. Cr. R. 343, 165 S. W. 576. See, also, Harrelson v. State, 60 Tex. Cr. R. 534, 132 S. W. 783, Bill of exception No. 2 complains that the court, over......