Stovall v. State
| Decision Date | 09 November 1908 |
| Docket Number | 13,532 |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
| Parties | ABRAHAM STOVALL v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI |
FROM the circuit court of Madison county, HON. WILEY H. POTTER Judge.
Stovall the appellant, was indicted and tried for the murder of one Mary Jane Richards, was convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to the penitentiary for one and one half years, and appealed to the supreme court.
Appellant and the woman whom he killed met each other in the road a short distance from her home. Their past relationship had been friendly, in fact intimate. Appellant asked her for his pistol which she had borrowed from him the day before, and the woman, having it at the time upon her person, gave it to him. Appellant then asked her for its scabbard, and as she did not have it with her they went together to her home to get it, one Prichard, who subsequently testified in the case going along with them. Arriving at her home she gave the scabbard to appellant, and they engaged in friendly conversation, Prichard being near the doorway. The pistol was of the hammerless kind, and while they were talking the weapon was suddenly discharged, the bullet from it striking the woman in the head and killing her instantly. Appellant testified that the pistol was accidentally discharged while he was attempting to break or unbreech it. Prichard testified that there had been no quarrel or unfriendly conversation between appellant and the woman prior to the homicide, that he saw the shooting but was unable to say whether it was intentional or accidental. No motive whatever was shown for the shooting, no bad feeling was shown to have existed between appellant and the woman at any time prior to the killing. Immediately after the shooting the appellant notified the owner of the farm he worked of the killing, came to the county seat, and voluntarily surrendered to the sheriff, expressing his regret at the occurrence, and stating that it was an accident.
Judgment reversed and case remanded.
W. H. Powell, Huber & Powell, for appellant.
Under the facts in evidence, the appellant cannot be guilty of manslaughter, even though the jury found him so. Appellant was either guilty of murder or the killing was accidental and he was excusable. There can be no grade in the offense, if he intentionally killed the deceased.
The first instruction for the state is fatally erroneous in charging the jury as to manslaughter. As said...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Calicoat v. State
...defendant, we find in the following authorities: Virgil v. State, 63 Miss. 317; Johnson v. State, 78 Miss. 627, 29 So. 515; Stovall v. State, 94 Miss. 373, 47 So. 479; Hannah v. State, 80 Miss. 375, 39 So. Parker v. State, 102 Miss. 113, 48 So. 928; Rester v. State, 110 Miss. 689, 70 So. 88......
-
Stevenson v. State
... ... 39 So. 855. This constitutes one class of case; the other ... class consists of cases in which this court has reversed ... cases because a manslaughter instruction, under such state of ... facts, was granted the state. A few of the latter class are: ... Virgil v. State, 63 Miss. 320; Stovall v ... State, 47 So. 479; Parker v. State, 58 So. 978; ... Walker v. State, 86 So. 337 ... II ... Next, the instruction complained of does not attempt to ... define the crime of manslaughter but leaves the [136 Miss ... 24] definition to the whim or imagination of the jury. It ... ...
-
Pope v. State
... ... error to give an instruction at the instance of the state ... authorizing a verdict of manslaughter, when in fact, there ... was no testimony upon which to base the instruction ... Virgil v. State, 63 Miss. 320; Johnson v ... State, 78 Miss. 627; Hannah v. State, 87 Miss ... 375; Stovall v. State, 94 Miss. 373 ... The ... case of Stovall v. State is so manifestly in point and the ... opinion so short, we feel that it will not be amiss to quote ... the opinion in full: "On the facts in this case, this ... killing was most manifestly murder, or nothing. If the ... ...