Walker v. State

• Decision Date: 21 October 1895
• Citation: 23 S.E. 992,97 Ga. 350
• Parties: WALKER v. STATE.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

23 S.E. 992

97 Ga. 350

WALKER

v.STATE.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

Oct. 21, 1895.

Homicide—Evidence—Instructions.

The charge, as a whole, was fair and accurate; the exceptions to it are without substantial merit; the evidence fully warranted the verdict; and there we s no error in refusing to grant a new trial.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

Error from superior court, Bibb county; J. L. Hardeman, Judge.

Gus Walker was convicted of assault with intent to murder, and brings error. Affirmed.

The following is the official report: Gus Walker was indicted for assault with intent to murder J. H. Raley. He was found guilty, and, his motion for a new trial being overruled, excepted. The motion contained the general grounds that the verdict was contrary to law, evidence, etc. Also because it is contrary to the charge of the court and to certain specified portions of the charge. Error in failing to instruct the jury as to what constituted the offense of shooting at another, and in failing to give to the jury any definition of said offense. Error in charging: "If a man brings about circumstances, if he himself is responsible for the dangers that he appears to be in, he cannot take advantage of the circumstances by which he is surrounded. For instance, if my action is such as to cause you to make an attack on me, I cannot take advantage of it, and claim that I was acting in self-defense. If I do such a thing that makes you make some effort towards me, I cannot defend on the ground you are making an attack on me. You can consider that, and see whether there was anything of that kind in this case on either side; see whether the action of Raley was such, in the beginning, to make the defendant believe he was making an attack on him; or go back to the first, and see whether this boy's action was such as to make Raley do anything towards defending himself, and, if so, he cannot take advantage of it. If Raley's action was first to put him in fear, then he would be justified, or be reduced to manslaughter, under the rules I have given you. If this boy's actions were such as to make Raley believe himself in danger, and that boy knew his action had caused it, he cannot take any advantage of his own act." Alleged to be error because it was inapplicable to the facts of the case; because it did not state the law correctly; because it was misleading; because the expression of "go back to the first, " etc., taken with the context, was an intimation by the court, —an assumption, —that the...