State v. Ewing
| Decision Date | 09 March 1912 |
| Citation | 67 Wash. 395,121 P. 834 |
| Parties | STATE v. EWING. |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Department 2. Appeal from Superior Court, King County; Wilson R. Gay Judge.
Henry Ewing was convicted of assault in the second degree, and he appeals. Affirmed.
Gill Hoyt & Frye, for appellant.
John F Murphy, Hugh M. Caldwell, and Reah M. Whitehead, for the State.
The appellant was informed against for the crime of assault in the first degree, the charging part of the information being as follows: 'He, said Henry Ewing, in the county of King, state of Washington, on the 11th day of April, 1911, did willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously make an assault upon one Sylvia Russell with a firearm, to wit, with a revolver-pistol then and there loaded with powder and ball, which he, said Henry Ewing, then and there had and held, and did then and there willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously, with said revolver-pistol, shoot at, toward, and into the body of said Sylvia Russell, with intent then and there willfully, unlawfully, and deloniously to kill said Sylvia Russell.'
The appellant entered a plea of not guilty to the information, was tried thereon and found guilty of assault in the second degree. From the sentence pronounced upon him this appeal is taken. On the trial at the close of the state's evidence in chief, the defendant moved for the dismissal of the prosecution and for a discharge on the ground and for the reason that the accused was charged with assaulting and attempting to kill one Sylvia Russell, whereas the state's evidence tended to show that the person assaulted was Sylvia Ewing, the wife of the accused. The motion was overruled, whereupon the court proceeded with the trial, at the conclusion of which he gave, among others, the following instruction:
The following instructions were requested by the defendant and refused by the court: 'I charge you that the defendant is charged with the shooting of one Sylvia Russell; and I charge you, unless the state has proven to you beyond a reasonable doubt as I shall define such a doubt to you, that Sylvia Russell was the name by which she was generally known in the neighborhood where the offense charged was committed, that you should acquit the defendant.' 'I charge you that the fact that the person the defendant is charged with shooting might be known by the name of Sylvia Russell only to the inmates of a residence occupied only by herself and members of her family who resided with her would not make her generally known by that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Jennen
...56 Wash. 384, 386, 105 P. 622, 624. Another case in point, which quotes one of the statutes to which we have referred, is State v. Ewing, 1912, 67 Wash. 395, 121 P. 834, where the defendant was charged with first degree assault on Sylvia Russell, and the evidence tended to show that the per......
-
State v. Crane
... ... is of secondary importance; and, if the defendant has been ... apprised of the identities, he has not been prejudiced ... Bennett v. United States, 227 U.S. 333, 33 S.Ct ... 288, 57 L.Ed. 531; State v. Ewing, 67 Wash. 395, 121 ... P. 834 ... This ... conclusion also disposes of the contention that there was a ... variance between the information and the proof because the ... girl whose earnings were accepted was not in fact Gladys ... Bates, but only a ... ...
-
Jackson v. Lamar
... ... circumstances and conditions will permit. Blake v. Jones, ... Bailey, Eq. (S. C.) 141, 21 Am. Dec. 530; Phinney v ... State, 36 Wash. 236, 78 P. 927, 68 L. R. A. 119. Having, ... as we believe, correctly stated the law governing cases of ... this character, we ... ...
-
State v. Chapman
...applying this statute under somewhat similar circumstances and in relation to a kindred contention, we stated in State v. Ewing, 67 Wash. 395, at 397, 121 P. 834, at 835 (1912): Formerly in the prosecution of offenses involving injuries to the person it was necessary to set forth in the ind......