State v. Council, A--132
| Court | United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey) |
| Writing for the Court | PER CURIAM |
| Citation | 230 A.2d 383,49 N.J. 341 |
| Parties | STATE of New Jersey, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. William COUNCIL, a/k/a, Johnny Willie Davis, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Docket Number | A--132 |
| Decision Date | 05 June 1967 |
Page 341
v.
William COUNCIL, a/k/a, Johnny Willie Davis, Defendant-Appellant.
Decided June 5, 1967.
Page 342
Myron P. Maurer, Newark, for appellant.
Richard B. McGlynn, Asst. Pros. for respondent (Brendan T. Byrne, Essex County Pros., attorney).
The opinion of the court was delivered
PER CURIAM.
Defendant was indicted for the murder of one Jake C. McKenzie on June 6, 1965. After a six-day trial the jury found him guilty of manslaughter and he was sentenced to State Prison for seven to ten years. He has appealed directly to this Court under R.R. 1:2--1(c).
The verdict was amply justified on the evidence, and no suggestion to the contrary is made on this review. In fact there was substantial evidence which would have supported a verdict of a higher degree of criminal homicide, if such conclusion had been reached by the jury.
The only ground of appeal asserted by defendant is that a portion of the trial court's charge on the subject of self-defense was erroneous. When such a criticism is made, an appellate tribunal does not treat excerpts from a charge in isolation; the charge is examined as a whole and if on such study prejudicial error does not appear the verdict must stand. State v. Hipplewith, 33 N.J. 300, 317, 164 A.2d 481 (1960). We have examined the entire charge here, particularly as it deals with the matter of self-defense, and although it is not as clear or as comprehensive as it might have been, we cannot say that it reveals prejudicial error.
Affirmed.
For affirmance: Chief Justice WEINTRAUB PROCTOR, HALL, SCHETTINO and HANEMAN--7.
For reversal: None.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Branch
...as a whole to Page 322 determine its overall effect." State v. Wilbely, 63 N.J. 420, 422, 307 A.2d 608 (1973) (citing State v. Council, 49 N.J. 341, 342, 230 A.2d 383 (1967); State v. Hale, 45 N.J. 255, 263-65, 212 A.2d 146 (1965)). The charge may be satisfactory where the "the trial judge ......
-
State v. Ramseur
...9 (1965), and if on reading the charge as a whole, "prejudicial error does not appear, then the verdict must stand." State v. Council, 49 N.J. 341, 342, 230 A.2d 383 (1967); see also State v. Thompson, 59 N.J. 396, 411, 283 A.2d 513 (1971) (trial court not bound to instruct jury in language......
-
State v. Clausell
...error does not appear, then the verdict must stand.' " Ramseur, supra, 106 N.J. at 280, 524 A.2d 188 (quoting State v. Council, 49 N.J. 341, 342, 230 A.2d 383 [580 A.2d 237] The trial court misstepped once in the instructions on both murder and aggravated manslaughter. Viewing the charge as......
-
Feldman v. Lederle Laboratories
...e.g., Latta v. Caufield, 79 N.J. 128, 135, 398 A.2d 91 (1979); State v. Wilbely, 63 N.J. 420, 422, 307 A.2d 608 (1973); State v. Council, 49 N.J. 341, 342, 230 A.2d 383 (1967); Stackenwalt, supra, 42 N.J. at 26-27, 198 A.2d 454; State v. Hipplewith, 33 N.J. 300, 317, 164 A.2d 481 (1960). Th......