People v. Curtis

Citation52 Mich. 616,18 N.W. 385
CourtSupreme Court of Michigan
Decision Date08 February 1884
PartiesPEOPLE v. CURTIS.

A statement of the accused, made some time before the killing which, standing entire, might be no more than braggadocio but which, apart being stricken out, might have a more serious meaning, should be admitted entire or not at all. It is error to admit only the more serious portion.

Evidences of the disturbances prior to the killing, and out of which it might have resulted, are properly received in evidence.

In a case of shooting, it is the duty of the prosecution to show that the ball that killed the deceased came from the pistol of the prisoner, and it is error for the court to prevent the prosecutor from making a full showing in this regard.

It is error to shut out any of the immediate surroundings of the affray, especially as to who the parties were that fired besides the accused.

It is unavoidable that participants in tumultuous scenes lose their self-control, and coolness under such circumstances would often be the strongest evidence of malice in one who then commits violence.

A dangerous felony may be prevented by one who is not himself in the wrong, directly or by complicity.

The use of a deadly weapon does not, as matter of law, tend to show malice.

It is error to charge, in effect, that while words will not justify an assault, they will preclude a person from resisting it.

Error to Cass.

J.J. Van Riper, for the People.

Harsen D. Smith, for defendant and appellant.

CAMPBELL, J.

Curtis was tried in the Cass county circuit court and convicted of murder in the second degree. Errors are assigned on rulings during the trial and in instructions to jury. Macom Wilson was the person killed. The facts bearing on the case are these. On the fifteenth day of August, 1883, the respondent with many others, attended a colored peoples' celebration at a place called Osborn's Grove, in Calvin township. Clay Wilson, a brother of deceased, had a temporary grocery on these premises near the south end, east of the north and south highway. Levi Wilson, another brother, was in the company, as well as Ami Curtis, a brother of respondent. After the celebration was ended, and just in the edge of the evening, Levi Wilson and Ami Curtis got into an altercation Levi had a knife, which, according to some of the witnesses he used in a threatening manner towards Ami. He also had stones which he threw at the latter. There is some doubt just how this fight began, but they were chasing each other round a wagon that stood there, when Macom Wilson came up and threw a stone at Ami Curtis, and, as some witnesses swore, was threatening him further, with another stone, when he was shot by some one, claimed to have been respondent. It is agreed that respondent fired a revolver, and that deceased was killed by a ball of 32 caliber, while respondent claims his revolver was much smaller. Several witnesses testify to another shot about the same time, which was not fired by respondent.

The controversy was,--First, whether respondent shot deceased at all; and, second, if he did, whether the act was murder, manslaughter, or innocent homicide. The bearing of most of the questions presented is towards the degree of blame, if any. Some questions bear on the entire absence of complicity in the shooting. A number of objections apply to the admission or exclusion of testimony, as to sayings and doings of respondent and others during the earlier part of the afternoon. The testimony indicated that the crowd consisted of neighbors and persons acquainted, and it appears that, during the final quarrel, there was a crowd at the place of the fight, and some noise and excitement.

The first question discussed arises out of the reception by the court of declarations made by respondent at 2 o'clock in the afternoon on the grounds. On objection made to the question whether respondent made threats, the court remarked, "Suppose he said he meant to kill the first person he met, and then did it; the witness may answer." The witness then swore, "I heard the defendant say he was going to knock down three men and kill one before he left the ground." Defendant's counsel moved to strike out this as not referring to deceased. The court struck out what was said about knocking down, and left what was said about killing; and this threat, as the court treated it, was made prominent in the subsequent charge of the court as to malice. Whether this declaration was admissible or not, it was in our opinion wrong to strike out the part relating to knocking down three men. Taken all together, it was open to the natural construction that it was no more than braggadocio, while standing alone it might have a more serious meaning. The whole statement should have been let in or all ruled out.

The court allowed other evidence of defendant's talk of a smiliar character to be shown, but refused to allow testimony that Levi Wilson was stropping his knife on his boot and trying to cut people, and made threats, and that other persons made similiar threats. This difficulty was thus allowed to be shown to have had some connection with the previous gathering, and yet evidence was only allowed as to defendant's conduct, while that of others was shut out. In our view all of the transactions of the afternoon were proper and should have been received. There is a great deal of testimony indicating more or less commotion and disturbance in the afternoon, and it is impossible not to see that many things might have been made much more intelligible if this testimony had been let in fully instead of partially and only as it bore against the respondent. All of the Wilsons, as well as some others, were mixed up in the disturbance, and defendant's conduct must be viewed in the light of all the surroundings. This is especially true as to Levi and Macom Wilson, whose conduct was the apparent provocation to defendant's assault, if he committed one, and must necessarily have a close relation...

To continue reading

Request your trial

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