State v. Porter
Decision Date | 31 July 1897 |
Citation | 49 P. 964,32 Or. 135 |
Parties | STATE v. PORTER. |
Court | Oregon Supreme Court |
Appeal from circuit court, Union county; Robert Eakin, Judge.
Kelsey Porter was convicted of murder in the first degree, and he appeals. Affirmed.
C.E. Cochran, J.M. Carroll, and C.F. Hyde, for appellant.
John L Rand, Dist. Atty., and T.H. Crawford, for the State.
The defendant was convicted of having committed the crime of murder in the first degree by killing one Joseph Benjamin Mache, whose wife and son, named respectively Mary E. Mache and Benjamin Mache, Jr., he also killed at the same time. The bodies of the latter had each a gunshot wound thereon of a nature to produce death almost instantly, and upon the body of Joseph Benjamin Mache there were found three gunshot wounds and a fracture of the skull, as to which latter there is some uncertainty touching the cause that produced it. Either one of two of the wounds upon the body, or the one upon the head, was sufficient to produce death. One of the questions most strenuously urged here involves the instructions of the court respecting certain statements of the defendant tending to connect him with the commission of the crime with which he was charged. The objection goes to the use made by the court of the term "confession" in connection with such statements. To be clearly understood it is necessary to recite some of the testimony relating thereto. Henry Oliver testified, in substance: That on January 1, 1896, the day of the homicide, he and his brother Charles Oliver, met Mr. Baker and the defendant about six miles from the defendant's place, where the homicide occurred. That Baker said to the witness: and that the witness asked defendant for some directions, to which he replied, "You will find them at the barn." Continuing, the witness further stated: On redirect examination the following was elicited: H.J. Baker testified, in substance, that he saw the defendant on the morning of the 1st, before 9 o'clock. He came to witness' place on horseback; was much excited; had a gun with three cartridges and one empty shell in it. Witness then responded to interrogatories as follows: " On cross-examination witness stated that the accused said he fired the shots from the shed, and gave as a reason why he did not give up the gun to witness at once that "he was afraid of being shot by this man Rockwood." Charles Oliver testified as follows: " The defendant, being called as a witness in his own behalf, testified, in substance: "I think it was on Wednesday when the trouble occurred. That morning, after feeding the stock, I went down and shoveled the snow off my
barn. It was just a little bit after I had been at the barn for the purpose of shoveling snow before the Maches came along. Prior to this time we had had some difficulty with reference to some harness which Ben Mache, Jr., and William Rockwood stole from me. When I got back from looking after the harness one day, Mr. Mache and his wife came down through my place. They stopped right close to my stable, and the old man disputed my word, called me a liar, and I told him that I wanted him to keep off my place, and not bother me any more. The Maches and Rockwood would go through there most every day, and this man Rockwood was implicated with these other parties, and was what caused me to get the gun in the first place on account of his being there,--this Rockwood,--for Bob Haynes was telling me about what Rockwood said, that he and Ben Mache was going to set me afoot, and put a bullet hole in me. When I got home, Rockwood came along, and he slipped his hand back on his pistol, and threatened to shoot me. He said, 'God damn you, I have been hunting for you; and I will fix you with my Winchester if you don't run.' That morning of the trouble I climbed upon the stable with my gun. I understood that Rockwood was going to take a gun that morning to raffle it off, and I was afraid of him. I laid my gun upon the ribs beside the rafters. I had not been there very long,--perhaps a minute or two,--when they came. I saw them down below, and they came through, and I picked up my gun, and went out on the west shed,--this shed that is near where they came along. The road passes close to it, and I stood on the shed with my gun in my hand, down by my sides. The old man drove up, and we commenced talking. I said, Says he, 'You lie; you lie,' and swore again, and says: Just then I seen something glitter off to my left side, and I turned to look that way, and I saw it was a pistol right there, and Ben Mache was pointing it right at me, and as I looked round the pistol went off with a bang, and I raised my gun to shoot at the boy, and he struck out on his horse, and run down a little to left as he started. He was in a hurry to get away, and was grabbing at the reins. I think the pistol is what caused the horse to shy; and as the horse ran down the road, running from side to side,--from one side of the road to the other,--I was shooting at the boy, and when the old folks got killed he ran right in line with them, so that in shooting at him I hit the old folks. I made no demonstration of any kind with my gun up to the time Ben Mache shot at me. I was just holding it in my hand. I had no intention of killing the old man and his wife, and they would not have been killed if Ben had not fired those two shots at me first."
Other evidence shows that the body of Ben Mache, Jr., was found 310 feet distant from the shed, and the bodies of Joseph Benjamin and his wife 420 feet from the same point, and that the shooting was done with a Winchester rifle. Three exploded shells were found at the shed, and two within six or eight feet of the sleigh. The court instructed the jury as follows:
It is contended that the jury might have been misled by the court's use of the term "...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Rader
...241, 250, 35 P. 655, 36 P. 573; State v. Tarter, 26 Or. 38, 42, 37 P. 53; State v. Henderson, 24 Or. 100, 105, 32 P. 1030; State v. Porter, 32 Or. 135, 154, 49 P. 964; State v. Bartmess, 33 Or. 110, 125, 54 P. State v. Smith, 43 Or. 109, 117, 71 P. 973; State v. Gibson, 43 Or. 184, 192, 73 ......
-
State v. Charles
...§ 23 at 22-24 (1975). Oregon case law, then controls the subject, and we turn now to a review of that case law. In State v. Porter, 32 Or. 135, 157, 49 P. 964, 970 (1897) this court found no error in an instruction stating that the danger justifying self-defense "must be absolute, imminent,......
-
Mccloud v. State, (No. 6501.)
...v. Cismadija, 167 Mich. 210, 132 N. W. 489; State v. Thomas, 135 Iowa, 717, 109 N. W. 900; 1 R. C. L. 550, § 99. Contra: State v. Porter, 32 Or. 135, 49 P. 964; Mortimore v. State, 24 Wyo. 452, 161 P. 766. It seems unreasonable to hold that a person who admits the commission of a homicide, ......
-
McCloud v. State
... ... weight of outside authorities, and by sound reasoning. 16 ... C.J. § 1467d; State v. Abrams, 131 Iowa 479, 108 ... N.W. 1041; People v. Cismadija, 167 Mich. 210, 132 ... N.W. 489; State v. Thomas, 135 Iowa 717, 109 N.W ... 900; 1 R.C.L. 550, § 99. Contra: State v. Porter", 32 ... Or. 135, 49 P. 964; Mortimore v. State, 24 Wyo. 452, ... 161 P. 766. It seems unreasonable to hold that a person who ... admits the commission of a homicide, but in the same breath ... states facts which excuse or justify the homicide, confesses ... that he is guilty of murder ... \xC2" ... ...