Sawyer v. State
| Decision Date | 17 March 1925 |
| Docket Number | 1 Div. 573 |
| Citation | 20 Ala.App. 504,103 So. 309 |
| Parties | SAWYER v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Monroe County; John D. Leigh, Judge.
Zollie Sawyer was convicted of manslaughter in the second degree and he appeals. Reversed and remanded.
Hybart & Hare, of Monroeville, for appellant.
Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., and Lamar Field, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
The offense charged against this appellant by the indictment was manslaughter in the second degree. There have been many definitions of this offense. See cases cited in Bailum v State, 17 Ala.App. 679, 88 So. 200. Generally it is defined as the unintentional killing of another in the commission of an unlawful act. However, when death is produced by an intentional blow, but without malice or the intention to kill, if the blow was wrongful, this would be manslaughter in the second degree, commonly called "involuntary manslaughter."
The questions of malice and intent do not enter into an accusation of this character, and in no sense are they material ingredients or constituent elements of the offense.
In the instant case two questions are seriously insisted upon as constituting reversible error; the first being that the testimony of state witness J.J. English was improperly allowed as not being of the res gestae. We do not so conclude from a careful reading of the testimony. It strikes us as being plain, from the testimony, that the transaction between deceased and defendant was continuous in its nature; that is to say, that from the beginning of the trouble, when the lick was struck, up to the time of the arrival of witness English the same controversy was in progress, and what English saw and was permitted to give in evidence was a part of the same transaction and was therefore of the res gestae. We do not regard the rulings of the court in this connection as error.
But not so as to the second proposition. The alleged inculpatory statement of defendant as testified to by witness Jim Morris was clearly not admissible. It was insisted that this statement was made by defendant several days after the occurrence complained of, and as the question of intent upon the part of defendant, in striking the blow, was not involved in the charge here made, the remark attributed to him, as testified to by witness Morris, could shed no light whatever upon any of the issues involved upon this trial. That it was hurtful to defendant and calculated to unduly prejudice the jury against him cannot be doubted. If the accused had been charged with murder or...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Duncan v. State
...could have been convicted of manslaughter in the second degree. Code 1923, Section 4460, Code 1940, Tit. 14, § 320; Sawyer v. State, 20 Ala.App. 504, 103 So. 309. such circumstances his charge relating to this degree of homicide should have been given. After a careful review of the evidence......
-
Jones v. State
... ... of city streets by pedestrians. This view of the law was ... expressed by the writer ... [109 So. 192.] ... in an opinion concurring with the presiding judge in his ... conclusion to a reversal in Crisp v. State, 109 So ... 282, and supported by Sawyer v. State, 20 Ala.App ... 504, 103 So. 309; McBride v. State, 20 Ala.App. 434, ... 102 So. 728; State v. Massey, 20 Ala.App. 56, 100 ... So. 625; Pippin v. State, 19 Ala.App. 384, 97 So ... 615; 1 Mayfield, Dig. p. 639, subd. 7 and 8, 29 C.J. 1149, ... par. 136 ... For the ... ...
-
Crisp v. State
...of law, except in its invasion of the province of the jury in charging upon the effect of the evidence. BRICKEN, P.J., in Sawyer v. State, 20 A1a.App. 504, 103 So. 309, this definition of involuntary manslaughter: "Generally it is defined as the unintentional killing of another in the commi......
-
Carter v. State
...could have been convicted of manslaughter in the second degree. Code 1923, Section 4460, Code 1940, Tit. 14, § 320; Sawyer v. State, 20 Ala.App. 504, 103 So. 309. Under such circumstances his charge relating to this of homicide should have been given." With urgent insistence, appellant cont......