McQueen v. State

• Decision Date: 27 January 1892
• Citation: 94 Ala. 50,10 So. 433
• Parties: MCQUEEN v. STATE.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

10 So. 433

94 Ala. 50

MCQUEEN v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Alabama

January 27, 1892

Appeal from circuit court, Butler county; JOHN P. HUBBARD, Judge.

Indictment against Peter McQueen for murder. Verdict of murder in the second degree, and judgment thereon. Defendant appeals. Reversed.

On examination of J. F. Brown, sheriff of Butler county, as a witness for the state, he testified "that, after defendant was arrested and in his custody, he made a statement to him about the difficulty, and that said statement was voluntary; that he made no threats, nor offered any inducements." On cross-examination, Brown said that defendant said nothing to him, except in answer to the questions propounded by him. The defendant objected to the introduction of any statement made by him to the sheriff, on the ground that it was not shown to be voluntary, and, upon the court's overruling his objection, the defendant excepted. The testimony for the defendant tended to show that he shot the deceased in self-defense. At the request of the solicitor, the court gave the following written charges to the jury: (4) "The court further charges the jury that 'premeditation' means determined on beforehand, but the required operation of the mind-the reflection and premeditation-may take place in the shortest interval of time, even at the moment of committing the act, as well as a month beforehand, and, like any other fact, it may be proved by circumstantial evidence which excludes every reasonable doubt." (5) "The court further charges the jury that a doubt which requires an acquittal must be actual and substantial,-not mere speculation or possibility. It is not a mere possible doubt because everything relating to human affairs, and depending on moral evidence, is open to some possible or imaginary doubt." The defendant excepted to the giving of these charges, and also excepted to the court's refusal to give the following charge requested by him: "The court charges the jury that unless they are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt, from the evidence in the case, that the killing of the deceased by the defendant was 'willful,'-that is, governed by the will, without yielding to reason; 'deliberate,'-that is, formed with deliberation, in contradistinction to a sudden and rash act; 'malicious,'-that is, with fixed hate, or done with wicked intentions or motives, not the result of sudden passion; and 'premeditated,'-that is, contrived or designed previously,-then they cannot find the defendant guilty as charged in the indictment."

Gamble & Powell, for appellant.

Wm. L. Martin, Atty. Gen., for the State.

CLOPTON J.

In Darby v. State, 92 Ala. 9, 9 South. Rep. 429, it was decided that when the presiding judge draws from the jury-box the names of 50 persons, and orders them to be summoned to appear on the day set for the trial of a capital case, and...