State v. Mcdaniel

• Decision Date: 27 December 1894
• Citation: 115 N.C. 807,20 S.E. 622
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court
• Parties: STATE . v. McDANIEL et al.

20 S.E. 622

115 N.C. 807

STATE .

v.McDANIEL et al.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Dec. 27, 1894.

Homicide—Charge to the Jury — Intoxication as a Defense.

1. On a trial for murder, a charge that defendants' "lives and deaths are in your hands" is without error.

2. It appeared that, on the night of the homicide, defendant declared that, if deceased went home with H., he would kill him; that, in company with another, he went to the house where deceased was, drew his pistol, and informed H. he would kill deceased as soon as he opened the door; and that on another's opening the door, defendant shot deceased twice. Held, that a charge that defendant was guilty of murder either in the first or second degree, or innocent, was not erroneous.

3. The fact that defendant was intoxicated at the time the crime was committed is no justification therefor, if his mind was still sufficiently clear to plan a formed design to kill, in consequence of which he deliberated and premeditated upon the killing.

Appeal from criminal court, Buncombe county; Jones, Judge.

Billy McDaniel and one Webb were convicted of murder, in the first degree, and defendant McDaniel appeals. Affirmed.

This was a criminal action for murder, tried before his honor, Thomas A. Jones, Judge, at the October term, 1894, of the criminal court of Buncombe county, and a jury; and the following are the defendant Billy McDaniel's exceptions to his honor's charge to the jury: "(1) His honor charged the jury, among other things, as follows: 'The question of their lives and deaths are in your hands. You must act honestly, conscientiously, and fearlessly.' To which Billy McDaniel excepted. (2) His honor charged the jury, among other things, as follows: 'As, in my opinion, there are no facts in this case from which you can infer that the killing was excusable, justifiable, accidental, or manslaughter, I shall not define the law in regard to said offenses, or give you the definitions. So, according as you shall find the facts to be, the prisoners are either guilty of murder in the first degree, murder in the second degree, or not guilty.' To which the defendant Billy McDaniel excepted. (3) His honor charged the jury as follows: 'A man may be intoxicated, and still have mind enough to plan, deliberate, and premeditate. If the intention to kill is deliberately formed, —is premeditated, —then the mere fact that the defendant was drunk will not make the crime murder in the second degree.' To which the defendant Billy McDaniel excepted. (4) His honor charged the jury as follows: 'The court charges you that if any of the evidence is sufficient to raise in your minds a reasonable doubt as to whether the defendant Billy McDaniel formed a deliberate, premeditated design to kill the deceased, then it is your duty to give him the benefit of such reasonable doubt, and he cannot be convicted of murder in the first degree, but only in the second degree, and your verdict should so be.' To which the defendant Billy McDaniel excepted. (5) His honor charged the jury as follows: 'If, notwithstanding the fact that you may believe that the defendant was intoxicated, you are satisfied...