State v. Holloway

• Decision Date: 08 May 1900
• Citation: 56 S.W. 734,156 Mo. 222
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court
• Parties: STATE v. HOLLOWAY.

56 S.W. 734

156 Mo. 222

STATE v. HOLLOWAY.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2.

May 8, 1900.

CRIMINAL LAW — HOMICIDE — REASONABLE DOUBT — LAY TESTIMONY — INSANITY — INSTRUCTIONS — IMPROPER REMARKS — REVIEW.

1. An instruction that a reasonable doubt of defendant's guilt must be a substantial one, formed on the careful consideration of all the facts and circumstances in the case, is proper.

2. On a prosecution for homicide, where the defense was insanity, an instruction was not objectionable because it informed the jury that defendant did the killing alleged, since defendant, by his plea of insanity, admitted such fact.

3. Where insanity was the defense on a trial for murder, an instruction that defendant might be of sufficient mind to intend the murder, and yet not be of such understanding and control of his mind as to coolly deliberate murder, and, if the jury so found, it must find defendant guilty of murder in the second degree, was properly refused, since defendant, under his plea of insanity, could only be found guilty of murder in the first degree or innocent.

4. Where the court's attention was not called to alleged improper remarks of the prosecuting attorney, and exceptions preserved, they cannot be reviewed.

5. A lay witness may testify that a person is sane without giving the facts on which he bases his opinion.

Appeal from circuit court, Osage county; Rudolph Hirzel, Judge.

John A. Holloway was convicted of murder, and he appeals. Affirmed.

Wm. A. Davidson and A. K. Monroe, for appellant. Edward C. Crow, Atty. Gen., and Sam. B. Jeffries, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

SHERWOOD, J.

The questions presented by this record relate to the homicide of Julius Boillot, perpetrated by defendant on Christmas eve, 1898, in Osage county, by shooting him to death with a pistol, and repeatedly shooting him after he had fallen to the ground. The circumstances relating to the death, and those preceding and subsequent thereto and connected therewith, are, in substance and effect, the following: Defendant, at the time of the occurrence, was a single man of about 31 years of age, born and reared near Aud, in Osage county. When about four years old, his father died. Soon after the decease of the latter, the farm on which defendant's mother lived was sold under a deed of trust for $600, which had been placed on the land by his father, and the land was bought at the sale by Julius Boillot. This sale, and the widow and her family being compelled to leave their home, engendered very bitter feelings in the breast of her son, and this feeling received accession in consequence of persecutions and annoyances to which the widow was subjected by having her stock killed or driven off or stolen, her fences thrown down and the rails hauled away, etc. Whether these acts were those of Boillot or not does not fairly appear. Finally, it seems, upon the payment to her of a sum of money by Boillot, the widow was induced to quit the farm, but bore within her breast, as did her son in his, but more intensely, a sense of having been grievously treated and injured by Boillot, in consequence of the facts aforesaid; and this bitter feeling suffered no abatement as the years went by, but gathered intensity with the lapse of time. As defendant grew towards man's estate, the mention of Boillot's name in conversation would often excite him to a phrensy of anger, which some of the witnesses called insanity, and others merely attributed such exhibitions to an ungovernable temper. In these paroxysms of rage he indulged in threats against their subject. About one year before the tragedy which forms the gravamen of the charge in the indictment, defendant was about to go and kill Boillot, but was prevented by one witness. On the night of the 24th of December, 1898, there was a public gathering at the school house at Aud, in Osage county, the people in the vicinity assembling for the purpose of delivering presents from a Christmas tree. Defendant was on the outside of the school house, gazing intently at what was going on in the school house, Boillot being in there. After the meeting had adjourned, Boillot had gone to assist his daughter in mounting her horse preparatory to returning home. While he was standing beside the horse, and about 15 yards from the corner of the building, where his son stood, the defendant came running around the house, raising his revolver, and fired four or five times, two or three of the bullets taking effect in Boillot's breast. He sank to the ground, and expired in a few moments. The defendant then ran a short distance, turned around, and exclaimed in a tone loud enough for a number of persons present to understand, "I am the Reverend John Holloway, and I have killed Jul Boillot." Defendant then disappeared in the woods, and was in hiding several days. He was arrested near his mother's home, at the house of a justice of the peace, to whom he surrendered, after receiving a scalp wound from persons in pursuit. Defendant was identified by the son and daughter of the deceased, as well as by other persons present, as the perpetrator of the crime. He afterwards admitted committing the deed, and said he was glad of it. Insanity was interposed as a defense. The testimony of the professional as well as lay witnesses greatly preponderated in favor of the view that defendant was sane. A sufficient outline of the testimony has already been given.

The instructions given on behalf of the state were 15 in number, and fully covered all the points necessary for the information of the jury in the performance of their duties. They embraced murder in the first degree and insanity with appropriate definitions, etc. To these instructions exception was saved on part of defendant, and an instruction asked for him in these words: "The court instructs the jury that the defendant may be of sufficient mind as to intend the murder of the deceased, and at the same time be not of such understanding and control of his mind and mental powers as to coolly deliberate said murder; and if you so find from the evidence you will find the defendant guilty of murder in the second degree." — and upon its refusal exception was saved. Particular assailment is made on the sixth instruction given, which is the following: "The court instructs you that the...