Taylor v. Commonwealth

• Decision Date: 27 April 1885
• Citation: 109 Pa. 262
• Parties: Taylor v. The Commonwealth.
• Court: Pennsylvania Supreme Court

109 Pa. 262

Taylor v. The Commonwealth.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

April 27, 1885

March 9, 1885

1. On the trial of an indictment for murder, it appeared that the accused, who was a convict in the penitentiary, killed his keeper while the latter was in the prisoner's cell yard for the purpose of locking him in his cell. The physician who made the autopsy was called by the Commonwealth and asked whether a certain wound found on the head of the deceased could have been made by a spool or bobbin found in the prisoner's cell just after the murder. This was not accompanied by any offer to follow the question by proof that the spool was really the instrument used to strike the blow but subsequently in the further examination of the physician he testified that the spool was stained with blood and had several hairs sticking to it and that the shape of the would showed it to have been made by the spool:

Held, that if there were any valid objection to the admission of the question it related merely to the order of time when it was asked, and that in view of the witness's subsequent testimony, its admission was not ground for a reversal.

2. Upon being arraigned the prisoner pleaded not guilty. Eight days afterwards the jury was sworn, without objection. The defence then asked to withdraw this plea and file a plea that the prisoner was a lunatic at the time of the trial. This the court refused and instructed the jury that if they found the prisoner insane during the trial, but not at the commission of the crime, they might say so in the verdict and the court would delay judgment and stay execution. Held, that in view of the time when this application was made, the prisoner received all the protection therefrom to which he was entitled.

3. Certain witnesses, not experts, were called to testify to acts of the prisoner within their knowledge, and conversations with him, and were then asked their opinions as to his sanity:

Held, that having testified to the acts and conversations upon which these opinions were based the same were admissible, and it was for the jury to decide whether the acts and conversations justified the opinions. Such evidence is admissible in criminal as well as civil causes.

4. While a slight departure from a well balanced mind may be pronounced insanity in the medical science, yet such a rule cannot be recognized in the administration of the law, when a person is on trial for the commission of a high crime.

5. The question of the degree or extent of unsoundness of mind necessary to acquit one who has committed a homicide, discussed, and the rulings of the court below thereon in this case, affirmed.

Before MERCUR, C. J., GORDON, PAXSON, TRUNKEY and STERRETT, JJ.

GREEN and CLARK, JJ., absent.

ERROR to the Court of Oyer and Terminer and General Jail Delivery of Philadelphia county: Of January Term 1885. No 220.

Indictment of Joseph Taylor for the murder of Michael F. Doran.

When the prisoner was arraigned he pleaded not guilty. On the trial before LUDLOW, P. J., after the jury had been sworn, counsel moved to withdraw this plea and file a plea that Taylor was a lunatic at the time of the trial. This motion was refused by the court and the jury instructed that " if the prisoner should appear to be insane during the trial (but not at the commission of the crime), the jury, if that fact appears, may say so in their verdict, or the court would delay judgment, or an execution would be stayed, if issued." (Fifth, sixth and seventh assignments of error.)

The material facts were as follows: Taylor was serving a term of imprisonment in the Eastern Penitentiary. On May 31st, 1884, Woltemate, an overseer in the penitentiary let Taylor out of his cell, about seven o'clock in the morning, into the cell yard, an enclosure about 8 by 16 feet with a gate opening into it from the cell and another gate opening into the main yard, for exercise. About an hour later Doran, who was Taylor's regular keeper, went into Taylor's cell yard through the main yard gate, to lock Taylor in his cell. About nine o'clock Doran was found lying in Taylor's cell yard on his face, obliquely across the yard, with his feet toward the main yard gate and with his head and face cut and crushed. Doran was removed and died at five o'clock in the afternoon.

The prosecution contended that as Doran passed into Taylor's cell yard, through the main yard gate, Taylor struck him from behind with a large spool or bobbin, (used by Taylor in his work) and then struck him again with a heavy iron bar, which was used to fasten the cell door. The cause for the killing alleged by the prosecution was that Taylor was angry at Doran for a supposed injury; that he had been given medicine to destroy his desire for masturbation, and this having taken effect, after he ceased taking it, he imagined that Doran was still giving him medicine in his food.

Dr. R. S. Huidekoper a witness called by the Commonwealth testified as follows:

I am coroner's physician; made the autopsy on the body of Michael Doran; the body was identified May 31st, 1884, by Michael Campbell and Dr. Robinson. I found the body slightly warm, and stiffness of muscles not yet set in. On the back of the head, to the right hand side, there was a lacerated cut from the right hand side running obliquely from centre outward and from above downward; it had a sharp edge above and bruised below. On the front of the face and head, on the right hand side of the nose, there was a cut one and one-quarter inches long, and had crushed in the bones of the nose; the wound was lacerated by a moderately sharp instrument. In the median line, over forehead, there was a straight cut through the skin without breaking the bone; over the left ear there was a cut of the same nature; over the right eye there was a cut through the skin to the bone without fracturing the bone; over the left temple there was an oblong cut about two fingers' width in length; there was a lacerated cut and a flap of skin turned.

Q. Could any instrument like this (showing iron bar) produce the wound you have described (to be followed by proof that this is the identical instrument)?

A. This instrument could produce all the wounds except the wound on the back of the head.

Q. Could this spool, or an instrument like this, produce the wound on the back of the head (showing witness the spool)? Objection by defendant's counsel because the question allows an assumption against the prisoner that the spool was used, by permitting the witness practically to state that the spool caused the wound; and because it permits a physician to give his opinion upon a question as to which he is not competent. Objections overruled and evidence admitted. (First assignment of error.

A. Yes. The cause of the death was blood-clot on the brain.

Cross-examination:

The wound on the back of the head was about two and one-quarter inches long, at an angle of 45° from the median line downward. The wound on the upper edge was a straight line, and the lower edge was forced away and bevelled downward with a convexity; the sharp edge of the iron bar would not do it. It was impossible to produce such a wound if the man was lying on his face… … On May 31st, 1884, after examining the body of Doran, I went to the office, and they showed the bobbin to Robinson and myself; on one edge there was a break in the wood, and there was a stain of blood still fresh and several hairs; at least four sticking into blood on the rough edge of the wood; the hairs were dark; they were stained with blood."

Several witnesses who were called by the Commonwealth not as experts, but to testify to certain acts of the prisoner and conversations with him, were asked on cross-examination by the defence, whether from what they saw of the prisoner they considered him sane or insane. Objected to. Evidence admitted. (Second and third assignments of error.)

The defence set up for the prisoner was insanity and several experts were produced who testified that in their opinion he was insane. The defence claimed that when Doran came to put Taylor back in his cell, the latter accused Doran of giving him medicine which Doran denied, and called Taylor a liar and struck at him; that then Taylor knocked Doran down with his fist and afterwards struck him with the iron bar not intending to kill him.

The defendant asked the court to charge, inter alia, as follows:

3. If the jury find that Taylor was not insane, but if they believe that Taylor struck Doran with his fist, under sudden excitement, and immediately after such striking, and in the continuing excitement, took the iron bar from Doran and struck the blow that caused death, then the verdict can be for no higher grade than murder in the second degree.

A. Affirmed. Unless he did strike the blow with a wilful, deliberate, and premeditated intent to kill, as specified in charge. (Twenty-second assignment of error.)

11. If the jury believe the defendant was laboring under a delusion that Doran and the other prison authorities were conspiring to take his life by means of medicines given to him surreptitiously in his tea, coffee, food and water, and that the prisoner was so confined that it was impossible for him to escape from his persecutors, except by refusing to take food and starving himself to death, and in that state of mind he struck Doran, the prisoner is not responsible, and should be acquitted on the ground of insanity.

A. This point assumes that which must be found by the jury. The existence of a delusion, unless an insane delusion, is not sufficient. If the delusion was an insane one, then the law is as stated in my general charge. (Twenty-ninth assignment of error.)

The general charge of the court was, inter alia, as follows: " If...