Stewart v. State

• Citation: 133 Ala. 105,31 So. 944
• Parties: STEWART v. STATE.
• Decision Date: 17 April 1902
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

31 So. 944

133 Ala. 105

STEWART v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Alabama

April 17, 1902

Appeal from city court of Gadsden; John H. Disque, Judge.

John Stewart was convicted of murder, and he appeals. Reversed.

The evidence for the state tended to show that the defendant shot the deceased with a pistol, without provocation, and that from the effects of the wounds inflicted the deceased died. There was testimony introduced for the defendant tending to show that the fatal shot was fired in self-defense. The only questions presented for review on the present appeal are those arising from the court's refusal to give the following written charges requested by the defendant, to the refusal to give each of which the defendant separately excepted: (5) "If the jury have a reasonable doubt growing up out of the evidence in this case as to whether or not the defendant acted in self-defense they must acquit him." (7) "The court charges the jury that it is a well-settled rule of law that if there be two reasonable constructions which can be given to the facts proven in this case, one favorable and the other unfavorable to the defendant, it is the duty of the jury to give that which is favorable rather than that which is unfavorable to the accused." (12) "The court charges the jury that if there is generated in their minds by the evidence in this case, or any part of it, after consideration of the whole evidence by them, a well-founded doubt of defendant's guilt of any offense, then the jury must find the defendant not guilty." (13) "If, after considering all the evidence, that tending to show self-defense included, the jury have a reasonable doubt whether the defendant is guilty or whether he acted in self-defense, the law says the jury must find the defendant not guilty." (14) "If after considering all the evidence in the case, that tending to show self-defense included, there is a probability of defendant's innocence, the law says the jury must give the defendant the benefit of such probability, and find him not guilty." (15) "The court charges the jury that a reasonable doubt of defendant's guilt is not the same as a probability of his innocence. A reasonable doubt of defendant's guilt may exist when the evidence fails to convince the jury that there is a probability of defendant's innocence." (20) "The law does not presume that the killing of the deceased was malicious because a deadly weapon was used by the defendant." (26) "To authorize a conviction in any case, every element which is a necessary constituent of the offense charged must be established beyond a reasonable doubt, and when self-defense is relied on as a defense there is no greater burden upon the defendant to establish self-defense affirmatively by a preponderance of the evidence than any other defense, and if all the evidence in this case raises in the minds of the jury a reasonable doubt as to whether the defendant acted in self-defense or not the defendant should be found not guilty." (33) "If the confession of the defendant is not harmonious and consistent with the other evidence, it is the province of the jury to reject it as wanting in credibility or as not entitled to weight in determining the question of the guilt or innocence of the defendant." (35) "The character of the deceased for violence, if the jury find from the evidence that such was the character of the deceased, and threats made by the deceased towards the defendant, if the jury find from the evidence that such threats were made, should be weighed by the jury in determining whether the...