State v. Ewing

Decision Date05 June 1947
Docket Number649.
PartiesSTATE v. EWING
CourtNorth Carolina Supreme Court

The defendant was tried upon an indictment charging him with the murder of his wife, Douglas Sutherland Ewing. The verdict was, "Guilty of manslaughter," and the judgment imprisonment in the State's Prison for not less than 18 nor more than 20 years, to be worked upon the public roads.

Since the only question presented on appeal is whether any reasonable inferences of defendant's guilt could be drawn from the facts in evidence, these are summarized as testified to by the witnesses. About 60 witnesses testified for the State and an equal number for the defendant. Only the more pertinent facts are here related.

Evidence for the defendant was mainly directed toward his condition of confirmed inebriety as bearing on his responsibility for crime, or the degrees thereof. Evidence for the State was directed toward the facts tending to establish the crime and defendant's connection with it.

A large number of the State's witnesses were close neighbors of Wall Ewing and his wife, Douglas Southerland Ewing, in the City of Fayetteville and gave eyewitness testimony about occurrences in and about the Ewing home for a period from two and one-half to three years prior to the death of Mrs. Ewing. The defendant is described as a man of from 235 to 250 pounds weight and his wife as a woman of 97 to 103 pounds. The evidence discloses that during all this time the defendant maltreated his wife, with mental torture, obscene revilings and continual beatings and threats to kill. These increased in severity and brutality until near the time of her death which occurred Wednesday, March 13, 1946, about one o'clock, a.m., in a hospital to which she had been carried after being found lying unconscious on the floor of her bedroom alone with the defendant, and covered with bruises.

On the preceding evening a call came to Miss Kate Southerland, a sister of Mrs. Ewing, to come to the latter's home. The evidence does not disclose the nature of the call or who made it. Miss Southerland, accompanied by a maid, went to the home of defendant's mother, living in Fayetteville, and with her, repaired to the house. The situation there was described by the maid.

Mrs Douglas Ewing was lying upon the floor of the bedroom unconscious. There was a large bruise behind her left ear, a cut across her forehead, and other bruises upon her arms shoulders and body. The defendant, the only other occupant of the room, was sleeping in a chair. Miss Southerland and the maid picked up Mrs. Douglas Ewing and placed her on the bed then left. Ewing awoke before they left.

Soon, Dr. Gainey arrived, who stated on the trial he had been called by Ewing. He stated that he found Mrs. Ewing in an unconscious condition, saw many bruises,--a dozen or more separate bruises--on her shoulders and arms, legs and thighs, one across the forehead and another behind her left ear. She was carried to the hospital.

The nurse in charge testified that Mrs. Ewing had many bruises on her body besides those on the head, some old and some comparatively new. Both thighs were burned in places six to eight inches long. "Part of the burn was in clear blister which was about two and one-half inches, the wide part of it, in a clear blister and part where the skin was burned off of either thigh."

The defendant came to the hospital, "under the influence of something;" was very boisterous. He spent most of the time in the room with Mrs. Ewing and was occasionally profane. Several times he went to the bed where the unconscious woman lay, slapped her roughly on the side of the face, exclaiming, "Snap out of it, you have been like this before. Snap out of it." This was accompanied with profanity.

While there the defendant told one of the nurses that Mrs. Ewing could have been hurt in an automobile accident "and scrambled through her hair." This was about ten minutes after her death. The nurse replied, "If she was in an automobile accident and got hurt like that it is a wonder you did not get killed," and the defendant replied, "Hell, I did get hurt on my legs." But the nurse saw no sign of injury.

Defendant also told another nurse his wife had been hurt in an auto accident which bruised him "just as bad as she was," but during the time the defendant was in the hospital he removed his pants and there were no bruises.

Before Mrs. Ewing died, the defendant said to another nurse, "Ray, I like to have got her this time," or "I am afraid I got her this time."

The autopsy was performed by Dr. Richard H. Follis. He found that death had been caused by external force, applied behind the left year, which disrupted the brain tissue and produced an extensive hemorrhage and blood clot, with consequent pressure and deformation of the lobes of the brain. On cross-examination he said it was the same type of force that came from a fall. Dr. Follis stated there were at least thirty bruises upon the woman's body, inflicted while she was alive.

The evidence leading up to this final stage is from testimony of near neighbors who were witnesses to occurrences about the Ewing home indicating the continual cruelty of the defendant to his wife, and amorous scenes between defendant and Miss Southerland, the wife's sister, some of the evidence indicating immoral relations between the two.

One witness testified that he had seen Mrs. Ewing creeping around the bushes at their home, hiding from her husband; had heard her screaming, "Wall, don't hit me anymore. You are killing me," not once, but a number of times, daytime and nighttime.

Another testified that Mrs. Ewing took refuge in her house, her hair "messed up," had a black eye, was bruised and nervous. Once again she came but was not admitted--was "battered up" again.

Another testified to seeing Ewing striking his wife. Another time they were standing on the porch, and he called her "you God damn s.o.b.," and knocked her off the steps. This witness testified she could hear Mrs. Ewing screaming at night and begging defendant not to hit her any more.

A witness testified he had seen Ewing and Miss southerland "sliding" in the back yard, and when Mrs. Ewing came out defendant told her to go back in the house. Some time afterward she saw Miss Southerland in Ewing's lap. Defendant had his arm around her and they were kissing. Mrs. Ewing came out and defendant told her to "get the hell back into the house." Another witness heard Mrs. Ewing begging Miss Southerland to leave, saying that she was lying in bed with Wall and breaking up her home.

Another witness, a member of an orchestra playing at a radio station owned or managed by defendant, gave testimony tending to show immoral relations between Ewing and Miss Southerland in the Ewing office.

At one time, testified another witness, she heard Mrs. Ewing begging defendant not to beat her, not to kill her. Mrs. Ewing came to witness' home several times. On one occasion she looked like she had been strapped with something. Witness heard her "hollering" night and day, at intervals of two or three days.

A witness testified that he had seen Mrs. Ewing running from her husband any number of times. At times defendant came out looking for her, using such expressions as "if you don't come back here you G-- d-- s.o.b., I am going to kill you." He had seen Ewing knock her out of the door and "run her through the neighborhood." He had seen defendant take his wife's head and beat it against the wall, with severe force.

Other witnesses testified to similar occurrences. The evidence disclosed that he had chased her with a shotgun, making continual threats to kill her, that she'd been seen dishevelled and bloody after his assaults, and that on one occasion she was so bloody that the blood dripped down to the sidewalk.

A witness testified that he saw Ewing pick up his wife "like a sack" and throw her...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • State v. Litteral
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • 5 Junio 1947
  • State v. Strickland
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • 22 Septiembre 1948
    ... ...          The ... challenged passage from the charge is entirely consistent ... with the opinions of this Court giving definitions, ... illustrations, and analyses of circumstantial evidence, and ... cannot be held for error. State v. Ewing, 227 N.C ... 535, 42 S.E.2d 676; State v. Johnson, 226 N.C. 310, ... 37 S.E.2d 913; State v. Kiger 115 N.C. 746, 751, 20 ... S.E. 456; State v. Carmon, 145 N.C. 481, 483, 59 ... S.E. 657; State v. Vaughn, 129 N.C. 502, 39 S.E ... 629; Wigmore on Evidence, 3d Ed., vol. 9, sec. 2497, p. 316; ... ...
  • State v. Reid
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • 16 Junio 1949
    ... ... inference to be drawn therefrom. State v. Braxton, ... 230 N.C. 312, 52 S.E.2d 895; State v. Gentry, 228 ... N.C. 643, 46 S.E.2d 863; State v. Webb, 228 N.C ... 304, 45 S.E.2d 345; State v. Hough, 227 N.C. 596, 42 ... S.E.2d 659; State v. Ewing, 227 N.C. 535, 42 S.E.2d ... 676; State v. McKinnon, 223 N.C. 160, 25 S.E.2d 606; ... State v. Brown, 218 N.C. 415, 11 S.E.2d 321. Here ... the defendant was never lawfully in the apartment of the ... prosecutrix, and the presence of his fingerprint on the ... inside of the window sill in the ... ...
  • State v. Cranford
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • 30 Noviembre 1949
    ... ...           The ... State must prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt ... State v. Creech, ... Page 424 ... State v. Harvey, 228 N.C. 62, 44 S.E.2d 472; State v ... Warren, 228 N.C. 22, 44 S.E.2d 207; State v ... Ewing", 227 N.C. 535, 42 S.E.2d 676; State v ... Godwin, 227 N.C. 449, 42 S.E.2d 617; State v ... Harris, 223 N.C. 697, 28 S.E.2d 232; State v ... Smith, 221 N.C. 400, 20 S.E.2d 360; State v ... Miller, 212 N.C. 361, 193 S.E. 388; State v ... School-ficld, 184 N.C. 721, 114 S.E. 466 ...    \xC2" ... ...
  • 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