State v. Powell

Decision Date29 April 1943
Docket Number15534.
PartiesSTATE v. POWELL.
CourtSouth Carolina Supreme Court

W H. Nicholson, of Greenwood, for appellant.

O L. Long, of Laurens, and B. V. Chapman, Sol., of Newberry for respondent.

STUKES Justice.

Jerome S. Powell, the appellant, and C. E. Pridmore were tried in the Court of General Sessions for Greenwood County at the September, 1942, term upon the charge of murder of Raymond Abrams. The trial Judge directed a verdict of acquittal generally of the defendant Pridmore and, as to murder, of Powell, but submitted the issue to the jury of manslaughter as to the latter and he was convicted and sentenced, and brings this appeal upon the refusal of the Court to direct an acquittal of him or to grant him a new trial after conviction, substantially upon the ground that the evidence was insufficient to sustain a verdict of guilty of the homicide.

The deceased and the defendants, all young men, were employed in cotton mill work in the town of Pelzer, but the deceased had recently lived in Greenwood and had registered for military service there. He asked appellant, who had an automobile, to take him to Greenwood on Saturday, January 3, 1942, where he had been summoned to appear before the Selective Service Board and agreed to furnish gasoline for the trip; it was afterward arranged that Pridmore would accompany them. They bought whiskey en route, of which they all drank at least some, and in Greenwood Powell and Abrams imbibed further, but neither became helpless. After the business of the trip had been completed and social calls paid they started on their return early in the afternoon but shortly stopped at a road-house where more drinks were indulged in and it was with difficulty that Powell and Pridmore got Abrams to leave.

About a mile farther on their journey Abrams began to insist that he be taken back to Greenwood to which Powell declined to agree, saying that they had to get home and that Abrams had put only five gallons of gasoline in the car. Abrams turned off the ignition and got out, saying that they would fight it out, and Powell met him at the back of the vehicle which was parked on the right of the road and they passed blows in which Abrams was knocked down and Powell struck him several times in the face after which Abrams said that he had enough and they shook hands and got back into the automobile.

Hardly had they started again, however, before Abrams said that he was not satisfied, again cut off the ignition and said to Powell that they would "cut it out" and drew his knife, but Powell had no similar weapon and was unable to borrow one from Pridmore so he got out and ran to the top of the adjacent embankment and took up a rock, threatening Abrams that he would hit him with it unless the latter put up his knife, whereupon the knife was given to Pridmore, the latter still sitting in the automobile. This time they failed to make friends and Abrams did not re-enter the automobile as Powell did, started it and drove off, Pridmore meanwhile returning to Abrams his knife. Looking back, Pridmore saw Abrams walking along the road in the direction that the car was going. Abrams had threatened them with arrest by officers to which is attributed in argument the fact that the car followed a different route back to Pelzer than that used that morning, but Powell and Pridmore stopped twice at least en route, showing no indication of intended haste or hiding.

The keeper of a filling station a few hundred yards farther from Greenwood than the scene of the difficulty testified that Abrams came in asking if he could do so for the purpose of warming by the stove, it being a cold and rainy day. His face was noticeably bruised and he...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • State v. Corn
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • July 28, 1949
    ... ... The rule of law applicable to ... circumstantial evidence is well established in this State by ... the following cases: State v. Kimbrell, 191 S.C ... 238, 4 S.E.2d 121; State v. Dornberg, 192 S.C. 513, ... 7 S.E.2d 467; State v. Edwards, 194 S.C. 410, 10 ... S.E.2d 587; State v. Powell, 202 S.C. 432, 25 S.E.2d ... 479; State v. [215 S.C. 171] Takis, 204 ... S.C. 140, 28 S.E.2d 679; State v. Hurt et al., 212 ... S.C. 461, 48 S.E.2d 313; State v. Manis, 214 S.C ... 99, 51 S.E.2d 370. It is not necessary to again set forth ... this rule of the applicable law, although we ... ...
  • State v. Manis
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • January 12, 1949
    ... ... The measuring stick in ... such instance is set forth in State v. Kimbrell, 191 ... S.C. 238, 4 S.E.2d 121, and followed and applied in State ... v. Dornberg, 192 S.C. 513, 7 S.E.2d 467; State v ... Edwards, 194 S.C. 410, 10 S.E.2d 587; State v ... Powell, 202 S.C. 432, 25 S.E.2d 479; State v ... Takis, 204 S.C. 140, 28 S.E.2d 679, and other cases; and ... is as follows [191 S.C. 238, 4 S.E.2d 122]: ...          'Where ... it is undertaken by the prosecution in a criminal case to ... prove the guilt of the accused by circumstantial ... ...
  • J.R. Watkins Co. v. Jaillette
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • May 1, 1943

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT