Thomas v. State, 45038
| Decision Date | 09 December 1968 |
| Docket Number | No. 45038,45038 |
| Citation | 217 So.2d 287 |
| Parties | Jacob THOMAS v. STATE of Mississippi. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Jones H. Hoskins, Cleveland, for appellant.
Joe T. Patterson, Atty. Gen., by G. Garland Lyell, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.
Jacob Thomas was indicted for assault and battery by intentionally pointing and aiming a pistol at one Eddie Evans and discharging the pistol and wounding Evans. The indictment was brought under Mississippi Code 1942 Annotated, section 2013 (1956), which provides as follows:
Any person who shall intentionally point or aim any gun, pistol, or firearm at or toward another, except in self-defense or in the lawful discharge of official duty, shall be punished by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars, or imprisonment in the county jail not longer than six months, or both; and any person who shall discharge such firearm, so intentionally pointed or aimed, shall be punished by not exceeding double such fine or imprisonment, or both; and any person who, by such discharge, shall maim, kill, or injure another, shall be punished by imprisonment in the penitentiary not exceeding five years.
The case was tried in the Circuit Court of Bolivar County. The jury found defendant guilty and he was sentenced to serve one year in the state penitentiary.
Appellant first urges that defendant was entitled to a directed verdict of not guilty. This assignment of error is based on the contention that the State did not prove the element of intent on the part of defendant. The shooting occurred between one and three o'clock on Sunday morning near a 'juke house' in the community of Skene. State witness Evans and his wife went to the 'juke house' where appellant was. Evans and appellant were friends and they laughed and talked together for a time. Sometime later, Evans and his wife went to their car; his wife got into the front seat, and about that time the defendant came out and asked Evans if he had a 'car pump'. Upon being told by Evans that he did not have one, appellant said: 'Ed, give me my car keys.' Evans said: 'I ain't got your car keys, Jake.' Evans was standing up against his car and appellant continued to demand that Evans give him his car keys. After some time during which the appellant continued to argue about the car keys, Evans' wife, Thelma, said three times to her husband that appellant had a gun. She saw it pointed toward her husband. About the time she told her husband for the third time that appellant had a gun, the gun discharged and struck Evans in the knee. Thelma Evans testified that prior to the shooting, 'Ed was standing right out kind of from his car, they was steady arguing about the car keys.'
The statute requires proof that appellant 'intentionally' pointed or aimed the gun at Evans. We think the proof on this point is ample. Evans was a reluctant witness and stated that he thought the pointing of the gun and the shooting was accidental. It is clear from Thelma Evans' testimony that appellant was insisting...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ballenger v. State
...the harm. [citation omitted]. Whitlock, 419 So.2d at 203. See also Palmer v. State, 427 So.2d 111, 115 (Miss.1983); Thomas v. State, 217 So.2d 287, 288 (Miss.1968); Summerville v. State, 207 Miss. 54, 64-65, 41 So.2d 377, 379 Hutchinson, 594 So.2d at 16-17. When Ritter testified without obj......
-
In re Miss. Rules Evidence
...are frequently used in developing preliminary matters. See Seals v. St. Regis Paper Company, 236 So. 2d 388 (Miss. 1970); Thomas v. State, 217 So. 2d 287 (Miss. 1969). When determining whether a child is competent to testify, a judge might also allow leading questions. See Allen v. State, 3......
-
Clemons v. State
...See also Ballenger v. State, 667 So.2d 1242, 1258 (Miss.1995); Palmer v. State, 427 So.2d 111, 115 (Miss.1983); Thomas v. State, 217 So.2d 287, 288 (Miss. 1968); Summerville v. State, 207 Miss. 54, 64-65, 41 So.2d 377, 379 (1949). When the defense attorney questioned Sudberry concerning his......
-
Blackwell v. State
...latitude in their examination. In view of the circumstances, we cannot see any abuse of discretion by the court. Thomas v. State, 217 So.2d 287 (Miss.1968); Summerville v. State, 207 Miss. 54, 51 So.2d 377 (1949); Cutshall v. State, 203 Miss. 553, 35 So.2d 318 There was ample evidence to su......