Miracle v. Commonwealth

Decision Date19 March 1929
Citation228 Ky. 591
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky
PartiesMiracle v. Commonwealth.

2. Criminal Law. — Law permits proof of crime to be made by circumstantial evidence, but circumstances must be so incriminating as to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

3. Criminal Law. — It is province of jury to weigh evidence and reconcile conflicting testimony, but when facts proven do not tend to incriminate, or establish connection of accused with offense charged, evidence is not sufficient to sustain conviction.

4. Criminal Law. — Since amendment of 1910 (Acts 1910, c. 92) to Criminal Code of Practice, sec. 281, Court of Appeals is authorized to grant new trial, when verdict of jury is palpably against evidence, and can be accounted for only on ground of passion or prejudice on part of jury against accused.

Appeal from Bell Circuit Court.

J.G. ROLLINS for appellant.

J.W. CAMMACK, Attorney General, and GEORGE H. MITCHELL, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

OPINION OF THE COURT BY JUDGE WILLIS.

Reversing.

Newt Miracle was indicted, tried, and condemned to life imprisonment in the penitentiary for the murder of Arthur Jones. He has prosecuted an appeal insisting that the trial court erred in refusing to grant a continuance, in the admission of incompetent testimony, in personally propounding questions to witnesses, in failing to instruct the jury properly, and in refusing to grant a new trial because the evidence was insufficient to sustain the verdict. In view of the conclusion we have reached respecting the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the judgment of conviction, it is unnecessary to consider any of the other questions raised or arising upon the record.

The Attorney General and his assistant, with commendable candor, advise us in their brief that they "have given careful consideration to the case and are unable to say to the court that the evidence is sufficient to sustain the verdict." Our examination of the record brings us to the same conclusion. In the first place, the evidence was entirely circumstantial, and indicated that suicide was quite as likely as criminal violence to furnish the explanation of the death of the victim. The deceased, on more than one occasion, had made expressions indicating that he contemplated suicide. He was shot in the forehead with his own pistol, which was found at his right side. He was shown to be right-handed. The powder burns proved that the pistol was fired at close range. The condition of the weapon and the filth that it carried indicated that it had dropped on the ground at the spot where Jones was sitting. Miracle and the deceased were friendly, and had been drinking together for several hours. No break in their relations of intimacy is shown to have occurred. The scene of the shooting was in plain sight of the road where people were passing frequently. No motive for murder is suggested. Jones was known to have $286 in his possession, and $285.58 of it was found on his dead body. The law permits proof of crime to be made by circumstantial evidence but the circumstances must be so cogent and incriminating as to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of the innocence of the accused. Moore v. Commonwealth, 223 Ky. 130, 3 S.W. (2d) 190.

The only proof offered to impair the presumption of innocence prevailing in criminal cases is the testimony of one witness that after the shooting Miracle passed him and did not mention the tragedy, and of another that he passed the place where Jones was shot four times, about 30 minutes apart, and saw Jones and Miracle there. The last time the witness passed was apparently after Jones was shot, as he saw Miracle leave the road and walk to the body, bend over...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Howard v. Commonwealth
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky
    • April 22, 1932
    ...149 Ky. 242, 147 S.W. 881; and Lucas v. Commonwealth, 147 Ky. 744, 145 S.W. 751." Also, in the later case of Miracle v. Commonwealth, 228 Ky. 591, 15 S.W. (2d) 429, 430, in its consideration of the evidence there before it as sustaining the conviction had the court "If every fact which the ......
  • Howard v. Commonwealth
    • United States
    • Kentucky Court of Appeals
    • April 22, 1932
    ... ... 191 S.W. 105; Crews v. Commonwealth, 155 Ky. 122, ... 159 S.W. 638; Hall v. Commonwealth, 149 Ky. 42, 147 ... S.W. 764; Edmonds v. Commonwealth, 149 Ky. 242, 147 ... S.W. 881; and Lucas v. Commonwealth, 147 Ky. 744, 145 S.W ...          Also, ... in the later case of Miracle v. Commonwealth, 228 ... Ky. 591, 15 S.W.2d 429, 430, in its consideration of the ... evidence there before it as sustaining the conviction had, ... the court said: ...          "If ... every fact which the testimony tended to prove be admitted, ... and the explanation offered by ... ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT