State v. Bryant

• Decision Date: 20 October 1920
• Citation: 104 S.E. 369,180 N.C. 690
• Parties: STATE v. BRYANT.
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court

104 S.E. 369

180 N.C. 690

STATE v. BRYANT.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

October 20, 1920

Appeal from Superior Court, Harnett County; W. M. Bond, Judge.

Wash Bryant was convicted of murder in the second degree, and he appeals. New trial ordered.

In apt time, the state announced that it would not ask for a verdict of murder in the first degree, and thereupon, and on plea of not guilty, there was evidence on the part of the state to the effect that, in January preceding the finding of the bill of indictment, defendant shot and killed his wife, Ida Bryant, and under circumstances that would make such killing murder in the second degree, as claimed by the state.

There was evidence on the part of the defendant that, at the time of the occurrence, the defendant, whose corncrib, situate some distance off, had been broken into, stepped to the window of the house and asked his wife to hand him his pistol, and in doing so it was accidentally discharged causing her death.

On these opposing positions, the issue was submitted to the jury, who rendered their verdict of "guilty." Judgment that defendant be imprisoned for the term of 12 years in the state's prison, and defendant excepted and appealed, assigning errors.

Young & Best, of Dunn, for appellant.

The Attorney General and Frank Nash, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

HOKE J.

It has been held in numerous decisions with us that--

"Where on an indictment for murder, there are facts in evidence tending to reduce the crime to manslaughter, it is the duty of the presiding judge to submit this view of the case to the jury under a correct charge, and his failure to do so will constitute reversible error, though the defendant may have been convicted for the higher offense." State v Merrick, 171 N.C. 788-791, 88 S.E. 501--citing State v. Clyde Kennedy, 169 N.C. 289, 84 S.E. 515; State v. Kendall, 143 N.C. 659, 664, 57 S.E. 340; State v White, 138 N.C. 704, 715, 57 S.E. 44; State v. Foster, 130 N.C. 666-673, 41 S.E. 284, 89 Am. St. Rep. 876; State v. Jones, 79 N.C. 630; State v. Matthews, 148 Mo. 185, 49 S.W. 1085, 71 Am. St. Rep. 594; Baker v. People, 40 Mich. 411.

That opinion then quotes from Kendall's Case, as follows:

"It is a principle very generally accepted that on a charge of murder, if there is any evidence to be considered by the jury which tends to reduce the crime to manslaughter, the prisoner, by proper motion, is entitled to have this aspect of the case presented under a correct charge, and, if the charge given on this question is incorrect, such a mistake will constitute reversible error, even though the prisoner should be convicted of the graver crime, for it cannot be known whether, if the case had been presented to the jury under a correct charge, they might not have rendered the verdict for the lighter offense."

And from Foster's Case:

"If it had been clearly explained to the jury what constituted murder in the second degree, of which, through his counsel, he had admitted himself to be guilty, it may be that the jury would have coincided in that view. But in the absence of instruction as to that offense, with only the issue of murder in the first degree placed before them, with instructions only as to that offense, with evidence of the homicide, it may well be that the jury held against the prisoner that he was guilty, simply because

...