Sides v. State

Decision Date07 March 1910
CourtMississippi Supreme Court
PartiesROY H. SIDES v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

March, 1910

FROM the circuit court of Yazoo county, HON. WILEY H. POTTER, Judge.

Sides, appellant, was indicted and tried for murder, convicted of manslaughter, sentenced to the penitentiary, and appealed to the supreme court. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court.

Reversed.

Henry, Barbour & Henry, for appellant.

The peremptory instruction asked for by appellant should have been given; it is perfectly clear from the evidence that Sides acted in necessary self-defense.

The jury arbitrarily disregarded the testimony and a new trial should have been granted by the trial court. Matthews v. State, ante, p. 169, 50 So. 561; Allen v. State, 88 Miss. 159; Bethley v. State, 13 So. 886; Jones v. State, 91 Miss. 868; Green v. State, 46 So. 252.

George Butler, assistant attorney-general, for appellee.

The testimony offered by the state, considered along with the physical facts, warranted the verdict.

Argued orally by J. G. Holmes and J. F. Barbour for appellant, and by George Butler, assistant attorney-general, for appellee.

OPINION

SMITH, J.

Appellant was indicted in the court below for murder, convicted of manslaughter, sentenced to three years in the penitentiary, and appeals to this court.

There were a goodly number of eyewitnesses to the killing, only one of whom was introduced by the state; several of the others being introduced on behalf of appellant. The witness introduced on the part of the state admittedly did not see all of the difficulty; his attention being first attracted thereto by the report of the first shot fired by appellant. The evidence of the other eyewitnesses is not in material conflict with the testimony of the state's witness relative to that portion of the difficulty which was seen by him, and from the whole evidence it is clear that appellant acted in necessary self-defense. The court, therefore, erred in not granting the peremptory instruction requested by appellant.

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the cause remanded.

Reversed.

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Vance v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • September 12, 1938
    ......State, . 126 Miss. 94, 88 So. 498; Blackledge v. State. 157. Miss. 33, 127 So. 684; Strahan v. State, 143 Miss. 519, 108 So. 502; Jarman v. State, 178 Miss. 103,. 177 So. 869; [182 Miss. 842] Weathersby v. State, 165 Miss. 207, 147 So. 481; Jones v. State, 60 So. 735; Sides v. State, 96 Miss. 638, 51 So. 465; Conway v. State, 177 Miss. 461, 171. So. 16; Henerson v. State, 180 So. 89; Wesley v. State, 153 Miss. 357, 120 So. 918; Walters v. State, 153 Miss. 709, 122 So. 189; Kelly v. State, 147 So. 487; Williams v. State, 160. Miss. 223, 133 So. 661; ......
  • Conway v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • December 7, 1936
    ...v. State, 88 So. 498, Walters v. State, 1'22 So. 189, defendant should have had a directed verdict. Gaddis v. State, 110 So. 691; Sides v. State, 51 So. 465; Staiger v. State, 70 So. 690; Williams State, 84 So. 8; Bedwell v. State, 94 So. 220; Williams v. State, 98 So. 242; Strahan v. State......
  • Sullivan v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • February 6, 1928
    ...... malice aforethought. This presumption, however, will give way. to the facts, when the killing has been explained to have. been done in necessary self-defense of the defendant or any. other person, and the defendant is entitled to be discharged. as a matter of law. Sides v. State, 96 Miss. 638, 51. So. 465; Riley v. State, 109 Miss. 286, 68 So. 250;. Pretty v. State, 126 Miss. 94, 88 So. 498;. McGehee v. State, 138 Miss. 822, 104 So. 150;. Straham v. State, 108 So. 502; Anderson Gaddis. v. State, 110 So. 691; Green v. State, 28 Miss. 687; Hawthorne v. State, ......
  • Winston v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • January 2, 1922
    ...... overruled; and therefore, as was shown by the state's. proof, that the appellant fired after the attack was made on. him by throwing a glass lamp globe in his face he then had. the right to shoot and the court committed error in not so. instructing the jury. Sides v. State, 96 Miss. 638, 51 So. 465. . . The. danger to Beverly Winston needed not to have been actual, nor. the killing of Tom Diamond unavoidable, to justify the. homicide, if he killed at a time he was in danger or. reasonably believed himself to be in danger of suffering. ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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