State v. Lewis
| Decision Date | 31 October 1878 |
| Citation | 69 Mo. 92 |
| Parties | THE STATE v. LEWIS, Appellant. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Appeals.
Henry T. Kent, L. B. Valliant and P. N. Jones for appellant.
J. L. Smith, Attorney-General, for the State.
This was an indictment against defendant for the murder of his wife in the city of St. Louis. On the trial, there was evidence to show a willful, deliberate and premeditated killing, by cutting the woman's throat from ear to ear, on the 13th day of October, 1876. The only evidence on the part of defendant was that on that day and at the time of the homicide, he was at Washington, Franklin county. To establish this he introduced five witnesses. In rebuttal the State offered witnesses to show that he was in St. Louis on that day. On the trial the court gave instructions explanatory of the crime of murder in the first degree, to which no objections are made. The defendant asked only one instruction, which the court refused to give. That instruction was as follows: “The jury are instructed, if they have a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the homicide alleged in the indictment, or was absent at the time said homicide was alleged to have been committed, they will find a verdict of acquittal,” &c.
The instructions given by the court were these: The defendant is charged with the crime of murder in the first degree, by having, on the 13th day of October, 1876, feloniously, willfully, deliberately, premeditatedly and with malice aforethought, struck, cut, stabbed and killed Mary Ann Lewis. Before the jury can find the defendant guilty of murder in the first degree, they must be satisfied, from the evidence, that the act of killing was felonious, willful, deliberate, premeditated and done in malice. Willful means intentional; that is, not accidental. Deliberate means in a cool state of the blood; that is, not in a state of mental excitement, caused by lawful provocation, such as a blow or other personal injury; known in law as the heat of passion. Premeditated means thought of beforehand for any length of time, however short. Malice means the intentional doing of a wrong act without cause or excuse. It signifies a heart regardless of social obligations and fatally bent on mischief. Malice and heat of passion are inconsistent, and cannot both exist together. Where there is malice there can be no heat of passion; where there is heat of passion there can be no malice. The existence of these constituent elements of murder in the first degree may be proved by circumstantial evidence; positive or direct testimony of their existence is not required; and the malice necessary to murder in the first degree may be found by the jury from proof of antecedent threats, acts of great cruelty towards the deceased, and from the use of a deadly weapon. In determining the existence or nonexistence of these elements of murder in the first degree, the jury should carefully examine and weigh all the evidence touching the act of killing and the language and conduct of the defendant towards the deceased at and prior to the homicide.
The jury are the sole and exclusive judges of the truthfulness of all the testimony, and have the right to reject and disbelieve any evidence given in the case. In determining the credibility of the witnesses, the jury should consider their manner upon the witness-stand, their character, their opportunities for observation, their relation to the parties and their feelings and interests. Partial variances or discrepances in the testimony of different witnesses on minute collateral points, should not be deemed sufficient ground for disbelief as to the material points, unless they are of such prominent and striking nature as to preclude the idea of their being the result of mere inattention, defect of memory or inadvertence. “The usual character of human testimony is substantial truth under circumstantial variety.” If the jury believe and find that any witness has willfully and corruptly sworn falsely to any material fact in the case, they are at liberty to reject and disbelieve the whole of the testimony of such witness.
If from the evidence the jury find that at St. Louis county, and at any time prior to the finding of this indictment, the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jenkins v. State
...French v. State, 12 Ind. 670; State v. Johnson (Kan.) 19 P. 749; State v. Conway, (Kan.) 40 P. 661; Pollard v. State, 53 Miss. 410; State v. Lewis, 69 Mo. 92; State v. Taylor, 118 Mo. 153; State Koplan, 167 Mo. 298; State v. Fox, 148 Mo. 516; State v. Harvey, 131 Mo. 339; State v. Kelly, 16......
-
The State v. Taylor
...received the unqualified and unanimous sanction of all the judges of this court in State v. Howell, 100 Mo. 628, 14 S.W. 4. In State v. Lewis (1878), 69 Mo. 92, the asked the trial court to instruct the jury, that if they had a reasonable doubt that the defendant was absent at the time the ......
-
Blackwell v. State
... ... 1 Greenleaf ... on Evidence, § 81b; State v. Waterman, 1 Nev. 543; ... Turner v. Commonwealth, 86 Penn. St. 54; People ... v. Fong Ah Sing, 64 Cal. 253; Landis v. State, ... 70 Ga. 651; Pollard v. State, 53 Miss. 410; ... Means v. State, 10 Tex. Ct. App. 16; State v ... Lewis, 69 Mo. 92; People v. Pearsoll, 50 Mich ... 233; Houston v. State, 24 Fla. 356, 5 South. Rep ... 48; Kerr on Law of Homicide, §§ 512, 522.' ... I think ... the instruction in relation to flight is erroneous and ... harmful, because it charges on the effect of the testimony ... ...
-
State v. Gabriel
... ... 194, 144 Mo. 323; State v ... Adkins, 222 S.W. 431; State v. Kinnamon, 285 ... S.W. 62, 314 Mo. 662; State v. Hall, 125 S.W. 229, ... 141 Mo.App. 701. (2) The court erred in refusing ... defendant's instruction in the nature of a demurrer at ... the close of all the evidence. State v. Lewis, 69 ... Mo. 92; State v. Baldwin, 281 S.W. 940; State v ... King, 74 S.W. 627, 174 Mo. 647; State v. Smith, ... 289 S.W. 590. (3) The evidence in the case does not support ... the allegations in the information. 31 C. J. 835, sec. 438; ... State v. Smith, 31 Mo. 120; Taylor v ... State, 130 ... ...