Washington v. State

• Decision Date: 19 April 1900
• Citation: 28 So. 78,125 Ala. 40
• Parties: WASHINGTON v. STATE.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

28 So. 78

125 Ala. 40

WASHINGTON v. STATE.

Supreme Court of Alabama

April 19, 1900

Appeal from circuit court, Washington county; A. H. Alston, Judge.

Charlie Washington was convicted of murder in the second degree, and he appeals. Reversed.

The appellant in this case was indicted and tried for the murder of one Bob White, was convicted of murder in the second degree, and sentenced to the penitentiary for 10 years.

The evidence for the state showed that, while the defendant was in the house of a friend, Bob White came up to him, and drawing his pistol and putting it in the defendant's face, took the defendant to task about something he heard the defendant had said about him; that, upon the defendant denying it, a quarrel ensued, in which the defendant asked White to let him alone, stating that he did not want any trouble; that White tried to take away from the defendant his pistol, which was in the breast pocket of his coat; that friends interfered, and that, as the defendant went from the room, Bob White followed him; and that, a few moments afterwards, the defendant shot him.

There was evidence tending to show that, shortly after White was shot, he came back into the room and stated that he had been shot by the defendant, and the defendant followed him in there, carrying his pistol and that of the deceased. There was other evidence tending to show that in a quarrel between the deceased and the defendant, which occurred after they left the room where the quarrel commenced, the defendant disarmed the deceased and then shot him.

The evidence for the defendant tended to show that, upon his leaving the room where the quarrel had taken place, the deceased followed him with a knife in one hand and a pistol in the other, and that, as he got him cornered, he was stabbing him with a knife when he fired the fatal shot.

The defendant separately excepted to the following portions of the court's oral charge to the jury: "(1) Before a person can take the life of an assailant, he must be in a position where he cannot retreat without increasing danger to his life or subjecting himself to great bodily harm. And if he can retreat without so increasing his danger to life or great bodily harm, he cannot successfully invoke the doctrine of self-defense. (2) If you believe that the defendant had both pistols at the time he fired the fatal shot, and the deceased was disarmed and defendant knew it, then this defendant would be guilty of murder in the first degree."

At the request of the solicitor for the state, the court gave to the jury the following written charges: "(a) I charge you gentlemen of the jury, that if you believe from the evidence in this case beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant shot and killed Bob White after the defendant had disarmed Bob White, and had the advantage over him and knew it, then the defendant would be guilty of murder, and it would be your duty to so find. (b) I charge you that, notwithstanding the deceased may have been at fault in bringing on the difficulty, the law gave the defendant no right to shoot him if you believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant shot deceased after deceased was unarmed." The defendant separately excepted to the giving of each of these charges, and also separately excepted to the court's refusal to give the following charge requested by him: "(1) The court charges the jury that if they believe the evidence in this case the defendant was free from fault in bringing on the difficulty."

Chas. L. Bromberg, for appellant.

Chas. G. Brown, Atty. Gen., for the State.

HARALSON J.

1. The evidence tends to show without conflict, that the defendant without fault in bringing on the difficulty, did what he...