State v. Gibson

Decision Date19 December 1928
Docket Number(No. 577.)
Citation145 S.E. 772
CourtNorth Carolina Supreme Court
PartiesSTATE. v. GIBSON.

Appeal from Superior Court, Swain County; Walter E. Moore, Judge.

Walter Gibson was convicted of felonious assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill, and he appeals. New trial.

Criminal prosecution tried upon an indictment charging the defendant with a felonious assault upon one Otis Carver, with a deadly weapon, to wit, a knife, with intent to kill, and inflicting serious injury, not resulting in death, contrary to the statute, C. S. § 4214, in such cases made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the state.

Verdict: Guilty.

Judgment: Imprisonment in the state's prison for a term of not less than two, and not more than five, years.

Defendant appeals, assigning errors.

W. G. Hall, of Bryson City, E. P. Stillwell, of Sylva, and Moody & Moody, of Murphy, for appellant.

Dennis G. Brummitt, Atty. Gen., and Frank Nash, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

STACY, C. J. It is not denied that the defendant cut the prosecuting witness with a knife, but he alleges that this was done during or following a fight in which he was thrown from the back of an automobile and rendered practically unconscious when his head struck the concrete highway, and that he did not know what took place for some time thereafter.

The court instructed the jury as follows: "If the State has satisfied you beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant cut the man Carver with a deadly weapon, then the burden shifts to the defendant to satisfy you that he did not know anything about this matter, that his mind was addled and that he knew nothing about it; he must satisfy you that at the time he was so unbalanced that he didn't know right from wrong, and the fact that he was voluntarily drunk and didn't know what he was doing, that would not excuse him. * * * If you further find that he knew what he was doing, you would return a verdict of guilty. If you find beyond a reasonable doubt that in the first instance the prosecuting witness was cut with the knife by this man, if being either admitted or proved that he cut Carver with a knife, that would presume malice on his part and an intent to do it; if he struck with a deadly weapon that presumes malice. If you further find that he had malice in his heart, then it would be your duty to convict him."

This charge forms the basis of one of defendant's exceptive assignments of error, and it is conceded by the Attorney General that the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • State v. Birchfield, 3
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • April 16, 1952
    ...inflicted on the person of his victim serious injury not resulting in death. State v. Hefner, 199 N.C. 778, 155 S.E. 879; State v. Gibson, 196 N.C. 383, 145 S.E. 772; State v. Redditt, 189 N.C. 176, 126 S.E. 506; State v. Crisp, 188 N.C. 799, 125 S.E. This being true, the sufficiency of the......
  • State v. Cephus, 77
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • February 24, 1954
    ...even when defendant's evidence tends to show that he acted only in his own necessary self-defense. State v. Carver, supra; State v. Gibson, 196 N.C. 393, 145 S.E. 772; State v. Redditt, 189 N.C. 176, 126 S.E. 506; State v. Revels, 227 N.C. 34, 40 S.E.2d 474; 6 C.J.S., Assault and Battery, §......
  • State v. Ferguson, 289
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • April 8, 1964
    ...death, cannot be said, as a matter of law, * * * to establish a presumption of felonious intent, or intent to kill * * *.' State v. Gibson, 196 N.C. 393, 145 S.E. 772. In State v. Redditt, 189 N.C. 176, 126 S.E. 506, it is said: 'The law will not ordinarily presume a murderous intent where ......

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