Phillips v. State, 17252
| Decision Date | 11 October 1950 |
| Docket Number | No. 17252,17252 |
| Citation | 61 S.E.2d 473,207 Ga. 336 |
| Parties | PHILLIPS v. STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
1. Proof of any particular motive is not essential to establish the crime of murder.
2. The verdict finding the defendant guilty of murder is fully supported by the evidence.
A. C. Carson, Carnesville, for plaintiff in error.
Carey Skelton, Sol. Gen., Hartwell, Eugene Cook, Atty. Gen., R. L. Addleton, J. R. Parham, Asst. Attys. Gen., for defendant in error.
Willie Phillips, under an indictment charging him with the offense of murder by shooting Ruth Wilhite with a shotgun, was found guilty without a recommendation and sentenced to death by electrocution. His motion for a new trial as amended was overruled, and the case is now before us for review.
1. The trial judge approved only ground 3 of the amendment to the motion for a new trial. This ground asserts that the State's evidence failed 'wholly and completely to show any motive on the part of the defendant to commit any crime.' This complaint is without substance. Proof of any particular motive is not essential to establish the crime of murder. Davis v. State, 74 Ga. 869(4); Hunter v. State, 188 Ga. 215, 218, 3 S.E.2d 729.
2. The evidence in this case discloses that, while the deceased, a woman, was in her home and seated in a chair combing her hair, she was killed by the defendant with a shotgun, without the slightest excuse or reason. All the evidence shows a brutal and cold-blooded assassination. In this englightened age, when everything is done to preserve and protect human life, it is shocking to the civilized conscience to find such an outburst of beastial brutality as shown by the facts in this case. The evidence abundantly supported the verdict, and there was no error in overruling the motion for a new trial.
Judgment affirmed.
All the Justices concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Humphrey v. State
...2 and that the defendant's claim of self-defense was concocted. The state is required to prove malice, not motive. Phillips v. State, 207 Ga. 336, 61 S.E.2d 473 (1950). The jury was authorized to refuse to accept the defendant's claim of self-defense, and reviewing the evidence in the light......
-
Darling v. State
...which are essential elements of the crime of malice murder. Spencer v. State, 231 Ga. 705, 708, 203 S.E.2d 856 (1974); Phillips v. State, 207 Ga. 336, 61 S.E.2d 473 (1950). 5. Appellant contends he was deprived of a fair trial before an impartial jury because two jurors saw him riding in th......
- Moore v. Moore, 17240