Thomas v. Com.
| Decision Date | 10 March 1967 |
| Citation | 412 S.W.2d 578 |
| Parties | Charles Edward THOMAS, Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH of Kentucky, Appellee. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky |
John W. Palmore, George T. Ross, Thomas D. Shumate, Richmond, for appellant.
Robert Matthews, Atty. Gen., Darryl T. Owens, Asst. Atty. Gen., Frankfort, for appellee.
This is an appeal from the conviction of appellant, Charles Edward Thomas, of voluntary manslaughter and as an habitual criminal.
On June 26, 1965, appellant, age 28, cut and mortally wounded William Boyd Reynolds with a knife while they were engaged in a fight near a beer tavern in Richmond.
This appeal is predicated on several grounds, the first of which is that the evidence of appellant's convictions of prior felonies should not have been injected into his trial for voluntary manslaughter. Appellant contends that he should have been tried solely on the merits of the substantive charge of voluntary manslaughter and then, if a verdict of guilty were returned, be tried on the habitual criminal charge--that the latter should affect the penalty, not the issue of guilt or innocence. This question has been settled recently in favor of the Commonwealth in Wilson v. Commonwealth, Ky., 403 S.W.2d 705 (1966), and by a five to four opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court in Spencer v. State of Texas, 385 U.S. 554, 87 S.Ct. 648, 17 L.Ed.2d 606 (1967), where the majority opinion said in part: 'To say that the two-stage jury trial on the English-Connecticut style is probably the fairest, as some commentators and courts have suggested, and with which we might well agree were the matter before us in a legislative or rule-making context, is a far cry from a constitutional determination that this method of handling the problem is compelled by the Fourteenth Amendment.' The four dissenting justices thought that the present Texas (and Kentucky) method of trying recidivist cases went to the very heart of fair trial and violated constitutional due process.
It is argued that the evidence does not support the verdict of voluntary manslaughter since the prosecution offered no evidence to controvert appellant's claim of self-defense. While it is true that uncontradicted positive testimony may not be arbitrarily disregarded, such proof may be overcome by circumstantial evidence. Montague v. Commonwealth, Ky., 332 S.W.2d 543 (1960). Here the circumstantial evidence is sufficient. Appellant testified that the deceased was unarmed, and it is well established that even if deceased had hit appellant first, appellant should not strike back with a knife unless he had reasonable grounds to believe that it was necessary in order to protect his life or prevent great bodily injury. Shepperd v. Commonwealth, Ky., 322 S.W.2d 115 (1959).
Appellant testified that deceased was choking him with one hand while hitting him with the other. A jury might well infer that deceased was not trying to choke appellant to death and that appellant, instead of trying to break away, was busy getting out his pocket knife. It might be noted that a police station was 75 to 100 feet away from the fight. At least one of appellant's friends was at the scene of the fight, and apparently he didn't think that appellant's life was in immediate danger for he did not go to his aid. The same friend also testified to the effect that deceased was choking appellant for only a few seconds before appellant stabbed him, which indicates that appellant's life at the time was not in danger. Appellant testified that he had black marks all the way around his neck from the choking, but he did not introduce any pictures to substantiate his allegation. Pictures of his swollen jaw taken the next day also showed that his neck was swollen but showed no signs of any marks. Testimony that the deceased had been cut and stabbed seven times was also considered by the jury.
Appellant contends that it was error for the court to admit two dying declarations allegedly made by the decedent to two police officers. Since these declarations showed only that appellant stabbed deceased, and appellant had...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Halverson v. Simpson
...when read together and considered as a whole, they submit the law in a form capable of being understood by the jury. Thomas v. Commonwealth, Ky., 412 S.W.2d 578 (1967).Halverson, 730 S.W.2d at 925. By determining that the combination instruction was proper, the Court necessarily determined ......
-
Borough of Wildwood Crest v. Masciarella
...States v. 50 Foot Right of Way, etc., in City of Bayonne, Hudson County, N.J., 337 F.2d 956, 960 (3 Cir. 1964); Thomas v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, Ky., 412 S.W.2d 578 (1967); 26 Am.Jur.2d Eminent Domain § 193, p. 873 The trial judge rejected the suggestion that because artificial structure......
-
Halvorsen v. Com., s. 84-SC-39-M
...when read together and considered as a whole, they submit the law in a form capable of being understood by the jury. Thomas v. Commonwealth, Ky., 412 S.W.2d 578 (1967). Likewise without merit is the contention that the instruction rendered the jury's verdict non-unanimous since it did not r......
-
Thomas v. Com.
...upon him imprisonment for life. An appeal was prosecuted from the original conviction which he now seeks to vacate. See Thomas v. Commonwealth, Ky., 412 S.W.2d 578. Thomas urges that: (1) The conviction must be set aside, since it was based in part upon a prior conviction in which he was de......