Outler v. State
| Decision Date | 14 June 1906 |
| Citation | 147 Ala. 39,41 So. 460 |
| Parties | OUTLER v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Covington County; H. A. Pearce, Judge.
"To be officially reported."
Elder Outler was convicted of murder in the second degree, and he appeals. Affirmed.
The evidence tended to show that defendant was at a well drawing water in the rear of Gordon Bros.' store, in Covington county, and deceased was on a wagon near the rear of said store. Defendant's wife came up to where deceased was and asked him why he had cursed her child, whereupon he cursed her and told her he would slap her head off. Defendant asked him not to curse his wife, and deceased inquired of him, using an oath, what he had to do with it. Deceased was drinking. Defendant replied that he did not want deceased to be cursing his wife, and approached deceased, whereupon deceased drew a pistol. Defendant closed with deceased in a struggle over the pistol, wrenched the pistol out of deceased's hand, and, as deceased was stepping off sideways, asking defendant not to shoot, the defendant fired three shots in rapid succession, two of them taking effect in deceased's left side and producing death. There was conflict in the testimony as to whether or not deceased was advancing on defendant when the first shot was fired. The defendant requested the court in writing to give the following charges, each of which the court separately refused: "(1a) If the guilt of the defendant is dependent on the testimony of Isaac Terry, and the jury believe from the evidence that the testimony of said Terry or any part thereof, was willfully and maliciously false then they can disregard his testimony in full, and must find the defendant not guilty." "(11) You may look to the fact, if you find it to be a fact from the evidence in the case, that the pistol used in killing the deceased was his own weapon, and not the pistol of the defendant, when you are fixing the grade of the homicide, if you should determine that the defendant was not absolutely guiltless." ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lovejoy v. State
...will omit any extended elaboration of our views. The following charges are abstract: 6, 20, 52, 73, 89, 127, 167, and 180. Outler v. State, 147 Ala. 39, 41 So. 460; Jackson v. State, 5 Ala.App. 306, 57 So. These are invasive of the province of the jury: 53, 54, 55, 56, 97, 102, 111, 122, 13......
-
Connolly v. State
...In this case, the conviction was not "dependent solely upon the witness' testimony with which the charge dealt." Outler v. State, 147 Ala. 39, 42, 41 So. 460, 461 (1906). The requested charge was not premised on the fact that the guilt of the defendant was predicated upon the testimony of a......
-
Edge v. State, 7 Div. 112
...49 So.2d 789. It is otherwise faulty. Andrews v. State, 134 Ala. 47, 32 So. 665; Goldsmith v. State, 105 Ala. 8, 16 So. 933; Outler v. State, 147 Ala. 39, 41 So. 460; Harper v. State, 8 Ala.App. 346, 63 So. There are other questions presented for our review, but they relate to familiar and ......
-
Wilson v. State
...one. A similar charge to 72 and 73 was held bad in Register v. State, 34 Ala.App. 505, 42 So.2d 519 (1949). Also see: Outler v. State, 147 Ala. 39, 41 So. 460 (1906). The trial judge gave a very comprehensive charge to the jury which we consider to be outstanding. The record discloses the c......