Walker v. State

• Decision Date: 01 October 1895
• Citation: 64 N.W. 357,46 Neb. 25
• Parties: WALKER v. STATE.
• Court: Nebraska Supreme Court

46 Neb. 25

64 N.W. 357

WALKER

v.STATE.

Supreme Court of Nebraska.

Oct. 1, 1895.

Syllabus by the Court.

1. Where insanity or lunacy has not originated since the offense charged is alleged to have been committed, there is no requirement that the existence of such lunacy or insanity should be determined by a jury impaneled to determine whether or not the accused is of sound mind.

2. The offense charged having been committed before chapter 44, Laws 1893, went into effect, it was not necessary that the jury, in the verdict of guilty, should fix the penalty which should be inflicted.

Error to district court, Dawson county; Holcomb, Judge.

John B. Walker was convicted of murder, and brings error. Affirmed.C. W. McNamar, for plaintiff in error.

A. S. Churchill, Atty. Gen., for the State.

RYAN, C.

Plaintiff in error was, in the district court of Dawson county, convicted of murder in the first degree. There was no controversy as to the fact of the homicide. The principal questions raised were as to the insanity of the accused when the act was committed and when the trial took place. When the arraignment was about to be had, there was a showing of the probable unsoundness of the mind of the prisoner to such an extent that he could not assist in the conduct of his defense, wherefore it was insisted that he should not be required to plead or enter upon his defense until a jury should be impaneled, and a trial be had as to his insanity. Upon the showing made, including an examination by the court of the accused, the court found and entered of record his finding that “the defendant understands the nature of the charge made against him, and that he is competent to make his defense in the action, and competent to plead to the information filed against him.” The court further found that the question of the sanity of the accused was properly triable upon a plea to the information. This was on the 12th day of September, 1893, and on the 23d of November thereafter immediately following the court further found “that no other or different causes or reasons exist therefor [that is, as to prisoner's sanity] than heretofore presented to the court; that the alleged insanity, if existing, began and was existing prior to said homicide, and did not occur since the commission of the alleged homicide, and is a matter properly triable upon the main issue in the case.” As facts, these findings were fully sustained by the evidence submitted. Counsel for the plaintiff in error cite but two sections of the statute in their argument upon the right to have tried by a jury the question of insanity before being compelled to plead to the information or make a defense against its charges. Of these sections the first cited (section 553, Cr....