Moran v. State
| Decision Date | 09 August 1904 |
| Citation | 120 Ga. 846,48 S.E. 324 |
| Parties | MORAN v. STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
HOMICIDE — EVIDENCE—DEADLY WEAPON—INSTRUCTIONS—VOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER.
1. Whether a stick exhibited to the jury was a deadly weapon was not matter to be proved by the opinion of a nonexpert, the jury being as competent as the witness to determine whether it was an instrument likely to produce death.
2. There was sufficient evidence of an assault by the deceased upon the defendant to warrant a charge on the subject of voluntary manslaughter.
3. All the other assignments of error having been abandoned, the evidence being sufficient to sustain the verdict.and no error appearing, the judgment is affirmed.
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Error from Superior Court, Crawford County; W. H. Felton, Jr., Judge.
Jim Moran was convicted of voluntary manslaughter, and brings error. Affirmed.
John R. Cooper, R. H. Culverhouse, and O. H. Danielly, for plaintiff in error.
Wm. Brunson, Sol. Gen., for the State.
LAMAR, J. Moran was indicted for murder, and found guilty of voluntary manslaughter. There were 18 grounds of the motion for a new trial, but, in view of the brief for the plaintiff in error, he is to be treated as abandoning all the assignments except that complaining of the court's refusal to admit evidence that the stick in the hands of the deceased at the time of the killing was a weapon likely to produce death, and those grounds of the motion which assign as error that the court charged on the subject of voluntary manslaughter. It does not appear what the witness would have testified in answer to the question as to whether the stick was an instrument likely to produce death. Griffin v. Henderson, 117 Ga. 383, 43 S. E. 712. Nor could any harm have resulted to the defendant from failing to allow the question to be answered, inasmuch as it appears that the stick was actually exhibited to the jury and introduced in evidence. The jury were as competent to determine whether it was an instrument likely to produce death as the witness. That being true, it was not a case calling for opinion evidence. Paschal v. State, G8 Ga. 818; Taylor v. State, 108 Ga. 384, 34 S. E. 2; Tatum v. State, 59 Ga. 640.
In his brief, counsel for the plaintiff in error contends that the state's testimony made out a case of murder, and that for the accused made out a case of justifiable homicide. His argument is that there was no middle ground, and nothing to warrant a charge on the subject of voluntary manslaughter. A...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Smith
...to society, is at least as competent as the witness to determine whether it was an instrument likely to produce death. See Moran v. State, 120 Ga. 846, 48 S.E. 324. [ID. AT 20. In State v. Haines, 545 N.E.2d 834, 835 (Ind.Ct.App.1989), a jury convicted defendant on three counts of attempted......
-
Moore v. Dozier
... ... In such ... a case as that indicated in the preceding notes, it was not ... competent for witnesses to state that in their opinion the ... mother was an unfit person to rear her children ... If a ... witness has knowledge as to the ... and Council of Macon v. Humphries, 122 Ga. 800, 50 S.E ... 986; Central of Georgia Ry. Co. v. Goodwin, 120 Ga ... 83, 47 S.E. 641 (1); Moran v. State, 120 Ga. 846, 48 ... S.E. 324 (1); Southern Mutual Insurance Co. v ... Hudson, 115 Ga. 639, 42 S.E. 60 (2). In Sumner v ... Sumner, 118 ... ...
- Tallent v. Hunter
- Tallent v. Hunter