State v. Jenkins, 18666
| Decision Date | 12 June 1967 |
| Docket Number | No. 18666,18666 |
| Citation | 249 S.C. 570,155 S.E.2d 624 |
| Parties | The STATE, Respondent, v. Jacob JENKINS, Appellant. |
| Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
J. Howard Wrighten, Fred Henderson Moore, Russell Brown, Benjamin L. Cook, Jr., Charleston, for appellant.
Sol. Arthur G. Howe, Asst. Sols. Robert B. Wallace, A. Arthur Rosenblum, Charleston, for respondent.
Appellant, Jacob Jenkins, was convicted of reckless homicide at the January 1963 term of the Court of General Sessions for Charleston County. This appeal reaches this court somewhat belatedly due to difficulty in obtaining a transcript of the trial as a result of the official court reporter having left the state.
There are numerous grounds of appeal, including the contention that appellant was entitled to a directed verdict, or to have the verdict set aside for insufficiency of evidence to support the conviction. It is well settled that on appeal from a refusal to direct a verdict of not guilty, the evidence and inferences that may be reasonably drawn therefrom have to be viewed in the light most favorable to the State, and if there is any competent evidence supporting the verdict, such will not be set aside. See cases collected in West's South Carolina Digest, Criminal Law, k1144(13) and 1159.
We proceed to state the evidence, and the inferences reasonably deducible therefrom, in the light of the foregoing principles. On Sunday, September 2, 1962, at about 1:30 P.M., a nine year old boy, Paul Wasdin, was instantly killed when struck by an automobile driven by the appellant on River Road on John's Island, a rural area of Charleston County. River Road is a part of the secondary highway system, located entirely on John's Island. It is paved, twenty feet in width, and at the point of the fatal accident runs in a somewhat northwesterly and southeasterly direction, but, for convenience, we shall refer to it as running north and south.
Paul Wasdin lived with his family on the west side of the road at a point just north of the intersection of the Seaboard Railroad with the highway. The appellant lived on another John's Island road which intersects the River Road approximately one and a half miles north of the Wasdin home, the total distance from the appellant's home to the Wasdin home being approximately two and a half miles. Mrs. Frances Blair, a witness for the State, lived on River Road approximately one mile south of the Wasdin home.
Shortly before the accident appellant passed the home of Mrs. Blair and the Wasdin home traveling in a northerly direction on River Road. At that time he was alone in the car and driving at a high rate of speed in the middle of the highway, his speed being estimated by witnesses as high as eighty miles per hour. The interval of time which elapsed between his first being seen by the witnesses and the accident is not precisely fixed, but it is inferable that such was approximately fifteen minutes. Appellant went to his home, picked up five passengers, returned to River Road and was driving south when the accident occurred.
A short time before the accident Paul Wasdin and his sister, Linda, age 12, rode their respective bicycles a short distance in a northerly direction on River Road, turned around and headed back home. As they neared the Wasdin driveway, traveling in a southerly direction, Linda was riding within a foot or so of her right hand edge of the pavement, and Paul was riding a foot or so to her left. Linda looked back, saw appellant's car approaching from the rear, and proceeded to get off the pavement to her right, at the same time calling to Paul to get off. There was no other traffic in the vicinity and Paul proceeded to the left side of the highway to leave the right lane for the passage of appellant's car and had almost gotten to the left edge of the pavement and straightened out when he was struck by appellant's car. The road to the north of the scene was straight for a distance of eight-tenths of a mile, giving appellant a clear and unobstructed view of the bicyclists for that distance, but he did not sound his horn on approaching.
Physical evidence indicated the point of impact to be well to appellant's left or the east side of the pavement, and that appellant's car skidded approximately ninety-two feet before impact. Paul's bicycle was demolished and the parts scattered over a considerable distance. Paul himself was dragged or carried more than two hundred feet. Appellant's car traveled a total distance after impact of approximately two hundred forty feet. Beyond the point of impact it skidded some distance, still on the pavement, and then left the pavement with its left wheels going in the ditch to the east side of the highway. From the point where the wheels entered the ditch to the stopping point, the shoulder of the road was torn up by the underpart of the car. It sheared off a sizable section of the bank of an intersecting field ditch, and finally came to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Simmons v. State
...manslaughter, or under Section 46--341, for reckless homicide. Proof of recklessness is sufficient to convict under each section. State v. Jenkins, Supra. The available punishment for the proscribed conduct, however, differs under each section. The maximum penalty of three years imprisonmen......
-
State v. Rowell
...that a much higher degree of culpability than "mere" or ordinary negligence must be demonstrated. For example, in State v. Jenkins, 249 S.C. 570, 155 S.E.2d 624 (1967), the Supreme Court held evidence which showed the defendant had been drinking, was speeding at an "extremely high rate of s......
-
Blackwell v. Herring
... ... Herring struck her. MCSD cites State v. Jenkins , 249 ... S.C. 570, 155 S.E.2d 624 (1967), DeLee v. Knight , ... 266 S.C ... ...
-
Blackwell v. Herring
...did not make it any more or less probable that Blackwell was walking in the road when Herring struck her. MCSD cites State v. Jenkins, 249 S.C. 570, 155 S.E.2d 624 (1967), DeLee v. Knight, 266 S.C. 103, 221 S.E.2d 844 (1975), and State v. Nathari, 303 S.C. 188, 399 S.E.2d 597 (Ct. App. 1990......