Scott v. Commonwealth
| Decision Date | 08 March 1895 |
| Citation | 29 S.W. 977 |
| Parties | SCOTT v. COMMONWEALTH. |
| Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
Appeal from circuit court, Larue county.
"Not to be officially reported."
Harry Scott was convicted of manslaughter, and appeals. Affirmed.
D. H Smith, G. A. Taylor, and Gore & Friend, for appellant.
Wm. J Hendrick, for the Commonwealth.
There had been, at the residence of deceased, on the day of the homicide, a wood-chopping, followed at night by a dance deceased being the fiddler. The evidence does not show appellant was at the wood-chopping, or invited to, or participated in, the dance. But he and two companions, having been supplied with whisky, carried in bottles, and armed with pistols, came to the house of deceased, and, while dancing was going on, took position at a window, where they had out their pistols; appellant, according to testimony of a daughter of deceased, who was dancing, pointing his pistol in the room where the dancing was. The three ruffians had not been there long before, as might have been expected, a difficulty occurred between another person and appellant, resulting in the latter going some distance away from the house; and the evidence shows pistol-firing was heard in a field towards which he went. He, however, subsequently returned, and was standing in front of the house, when deceased came out of it, and, after speaking to persons standing at the corner of the house, approached him, saying, to which appellant replied, Deceased then said, "You will go now," advancing on him. Deceased continued to advance, appellant backing, until they had gotten about 10 feet, when appellant said, "If you don't stop, I will shoot you." After a distance of about 16 feet had been thus covered, deceased still advancing, appellant commenced and continued shooting until he had put five bullets in the body of deceased, resulting in his death. And now we have an appeal from a judgment convicting him of manslaughter, and sentencing him to confinement in the penitentiary for six years.
Though it is contended there was permitted to go to the jury incompetent evidence, we do not perceive any error in that respect. The only action of the court, the correctness of which there is any necessity for discussing, is the following qualification of the instruction as to appellant's right of self-defense: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Brinkley
...use necessary force to effect such. State v. Reed, 154 Mo. 125, 55 S.W. 278; Brinkley v. State, 89 Ala. 34, 8 So. 22; Scott v. Commonwealth, 16 Ky. L.R. 702, 29 S.W. 977; State v. Raper, 141 Mo. 327, 42 S.W. 935; 25 A.L.R. 508. (13) Defense of property other than dwelling. State v. Shiles, ......
-
Bonner v. Commonwealth
... ... find that defendant did all the acts set forth in said ... instruction without believing it to the exclusion of a ... reasonable doubt, although it was a matter upon which his ... guilt or innocence in a certain state of case depended ... Allen v. Com., 86 Ky. 642, 6 S.W. 645; Scott v ... Com. (Ky.) 29 S.W. 977. This instruction was prejudicial ... to the defendant, and should not have been given. Wherefore, ... the judgment is reversed, and ... [38 S.W. 489.] ... cause remanded, with direction to the circuit court ... ...