State v. Brandon
| Decision Date | 30 June 1862 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE v. WILLIAM L. BRANDON. |
No declarations of a prisoner made after the commission of a homicide, as to the manner of the transaction, that are not part of the res gestæ, are admissible for him.
If a party deliberately kill another to prevent a mere trespass to property, he is guilty of murder.
The law does not recognize any moral power as compelling a man to do what he knows to be wrong.
The insanity which takes away the criminal quality of an act, must be such as amounts to a mental disease, and prevents the accused from knowing the nature and quality of the act he is doing.
INDICTMENT for MURDER, tried before BAILEY, J., at Fall Term, 1861, of Caswell Superior Court.
The defendant was indicted for the murder of one William J. Connelly, his father-in-law. He was living on a place belonging to the deceased, some six miles from the residence of the latter, under an agreement that he should have all he made over and above what was required to support his children and three daughters of the deceased, who lived in the house with the defendant. The corn had been gathered and was in a pen on the premises. On the day before the homicide, as was stated by one Jackson, the defendant was in his granary with his gun and two dogs; on being asked what he was doing there, he said that Connelly had gone to 'Squire Richmond's to get a writ, and have him put out, and divide the corn, and if he came there, he intended to kill him; that Connelly had taken his daughter, Jane, to Richmond's, and she had sworn to one lie against him, and he didn't intend to stand it any longer.
John Moore swore that he lived with the prisoner; that the crop of corn, made in 1860, was gathered and put in a pen near the granary; that Connelly came there, Friday,___day of November, and put his horse in the stable, and the usual salutations passed between Connelly and the prisoner; that the defendant was sitting in the door of the granary with his gun inside, near him; that Connelly got on the corn in the pen, and threw a few hands full of corn into the wagon, when the prisoner said to him, “old man get down off of that pen and go out of the lot, or I will hurt you;” that Connelly got down from the pen, saying something that witness did not hear distinctly; that at this time the prisoner came out of the door of the granary, with his gun in his hands, and they walked a few steps towards each other; the prisoner then raised his gun, took aim at the deceased and shot him; that the deceased was also going in the direction of the stable, where his horse was, and had nothing in his hands when the gun fired; that he was about 63 years of age.
Dr. Brooks, after testifying as to the extent of the wound, stated that the father of the prisoner was deranged, at one time, for about two months; that the prisoner had a sister, an uncle, and an aunt, who had been deranged. He alse testified to the singular conduct of the prisoner when drunk, but did not consider him deranged at that time.
Mr. Warf stated, that he saw the prisoner in the granary with his gun, and Connelly on the pen; that prisoner ordered him down; that Connelly threw several hands full of corn into the wagon, and told John Moore to get the measuring tub; John said it was locked up and prisoner had the key; he told Moore to burst the door open and bring it to him; that every thing there belonged to him; Prisoner then said, “old man, get down from there and go out of the lot, or I will hurt you; you are meddling with that that does not concern you or yours.” Connelly replied, “I will show you, you villain, to whom it belongs;” Connelly got off the pen quickly, and the boys got down at the same time; that the witness then turned towards the gate, and presently heard the report of the gun; that he then returned, and found Connelly lying with his head within three feet of the post of the granary, and a stick lying near the body of the deceased, and blood upon the hand of the prisoner; that shortly afterwards he examined the hand of the prisoner, and the skin was off for about the size of a ten cent piece. This witness, and several others, testified as to the conduct of the prisoner, prior to the commission of the act, tending to show that he was deranged, and that his ancestors were deranged.
The prisoner then offered to give in evidence what he said to Dr. Brooks shortly after the homicide was committed, to wit, that the wound, on his hand, was caused by a blow given by deceased with a stick, which caused the blood on his hand. This evidence was rejected by the Court, and defendant's counsel excepted.
The prisoner's counsel insisted, 1st, that although the prisoner knew it was wrong to kill the deceased, yet, if he was impelled to the act by a moral power, which he could not resist, he was excusable.
2. That if the deceased committed a trespass in attempting to take away the corn, and the prisoner, in order to protect his property, shot and killed the trespasser, it would be manslaughter and not murder. The Court charged the jury, that if the prisoner was insane at the time of committing the homicide, they should acquit him; that every one was presumed to be sane until the contrary was shown; that the prisoner must satisfy them of that fact. Defendant's counsel excepted to the charge.
Verdict--guilty of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Creech, 218.
...right and wrong at the time and in respect of the matter under investigation. State v. Potts, 100 N.C. 457, 6 S.E. 657; State v. Brandon, 53 N.C. 463. He who knows the right and still the wrong pursues is amenable to the criminal law. State v. Jenkins, 208 N.C. 740, 182 S.E'. 324. On the ot......
-
State v. Creech
...between right and wrong at the time and in respect of the matter under investigation. State v. Potts, 100 N.C. 457, 6 S.E. 657; State v. Brandon, 53 N.C. 463. He knows the right and still the wrong pursues is amenable to the criminal law. State v. Jenkins, 208 N.C. 740, 182 S.E. 324. On the......
-
State v. Harris, 651.
...right and wrong at the time and in respect of the matter under investigation. State v. Potts, 100 N.C. 457, 6 S.E. 657; State v. Brandon, 53 N.C. 463. He who knows the right and still the wrong pursues is amenable to the criminal law. State v. Jenkins, 208 N. C. 740, 182 S.E. 324. On the ot......
-
State v. Harris
...between right and wrong at the time and in respect of the matter under investigation. State v. Potts, 100 N.C. 457, 6 S.E. 657; State v. Brandon, 53 N.C. 463. He who knows the right and still the wrong pursues is amenable to the criminal law. State v. Jenkins, 208 N.C. 740, 182 S.E. 324. On......