State v. Melton
| Decision Date | 02 April 1924 |
| Docket Number | (No. 279.) |
| Citation | 122 S.E. 17 |
| Parties | STATE. v. MELTON. |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
Stacy, J, dissenting in part, but concurring in the result.
Appeal from Superior Court, Hoke County; Cranmer, Judge.
Lexie Melton was convicted of manslaughter, and appeals. New trial.
Currie & Leach, of Raeford, and W. H. Weatherspoon, of Laurinsburg, for appellant.
James S. Manning, Atty. Gen., and Frank Nash, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
ADAMS, J, The defendant's evidence tended to show that on Saturday night, August 20, 1921, Walter Smith, the deceased, went to the home of W. N. Brown, whose daughter was the defendant's wife, and thatearly Sunday morning the deceased, the defendant, and Frank Brown, a son of W. A. Brown, were together at Dave William's. The deceased had been drinking freely, and these three went to a place in the woods where some whisky had been concealed and poured a quantity of it from a jug into a fruit jar. They then went to the "still ford" where they stopped and drank some of the liquor. The deceased said he was "sick." The defendant and Brown tried to induce him to go with them, and, failing in their effort, they carried him about 40 yards from the branch, laid him down, and left him.
There was other evidence tending to show that the defendant told one of the witnesses where he had last seen the deceased, and that the body was found at this place on Monday morning about 9 or 10 o'clock bruised and discolored. On the right side of the head there was a bruise which had probably been caused by a blunt instrument, and another above the eye; also a "longitudinal bruise" on the back indicating that the deceased had been struck while lying down. His throat was swollen and his chest discolored; there were finger prints on his throat—"two impressions with demarcation between them." A physician testified that lie examined the deceased at 11 o'clock on Monday, that he had been dead "six to eight to ten hours, " and that his death had been caused by choking or suffocation.
The defendant testified that he last saw the deceased on Sunday morning between 7 and 8 o'clock, but there were circumstances from which the jury might have inferred and no doubt did infer that the deceased was carried into the woods several hours later.
If the deceased had been dead from six to 10 hours when the physician made his examination, the death occurred between midnight and 5 o'clock on Monday morning. In order to meet this theory the defendant introduced evidence of an alibi, he and his wife testifying that on Sunday afternoon they went to Neill Baker's and remained there all night. As to this circumstance their evidence was corroborated by that of Neill Baker.
In his charge to the jury his honor did not refer to this contention or instruct the jury as to the law applicable to evidence of an alibi, and to this omission the defendant entered an exception. The question is whether in the absence of a special request his honor's failure to instruct the jury upon this phase of the evidence constitutes reversible error.
The statute provides that the judge shall state in a plain and correct manner the evidence given in the case and declare and explain the law arising...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Faust
...jury consider and pass upon any and all defenses which arise upon the evidence, under proper instructions by the court. State v. Melton, 187 N.C. 481, 482, 122 S.E. 17. In order to better understand the purport of the testimony given by defense witness Stewart, we first examine the testimon......
-
State v. Hunt
...N.C. 522, 524, 128 S.E.2d 860, 862 (1963); State v. Spencer, 256 N.C. 487, 488--489, 124 S.E.2d 175, 176--177 (1962); State v. Melton, 187 N.C. 481, 122 S.E. 17 (1924). On account of the court's failure to so charge, defendant must be and is awarded a new Although we recognize defendant's r......
-
State v. Coffey
...which tends to connect the defendant with the killing is circumstantial. Nevertheless it points unerringly to his guilt. State v. Melton, 187 N.C. 481, 122 S.E. 17. The defendant had been charged by the deceased, who was his uncle, with the larceny of some possum hides. He was to be tried o......
-
State v. Baskin
...alone, the facts established or adduced on the hearing must . . . exclude every rational hypothesis of innocence." State v. Melton, 187 N.C. 481, 483, 122 S.E. 17, 18 (1924) (Stacy, J., concurring in the finding of error and in the grant of a new trial for the reasons cited by the Court, bu......