Welch v. State, 6 Div. 927
Decision Date | 20 January 1976 |
Docket Number | 6 Div. 927 |
Citation | 326 So.2d 137,57 Ala.App. 72 |
Parties | John Earl WELCH v. STATE. |
Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
Sam A Beatty, Northport, for appellant.
William J. Baxley, Atty. Gen., and Sarah M. Greenhaw, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
Second degree murder; sentence: ten years imprisonment.
The evidence shows that the deceased, Adam McCants, had an argument with his mother-in-law who lived with him and his wife. The mother-in-law called her son, the appellant, to come and move her out of the apartment. When he arrived, he had words with the deceased and then began taking his mother's belongings out to his car. The remainder of the evidence is in dispute.
The State introduced testimony that on arriving at the apartment, the appellant went to a neighbor's yard where the deceased was, pulled a knife and threatened to cut the deceased's throat. They argued and then went to the deceased's apartment where appellant began loading the car. Johnny Bob Peck testified that he saw the appellant stab the deceased on the front porch of the apartment.
Brenda Faye Furr testified for the appellant. She was in his car when the incident occurred. She said she looked up and saw the deceased grab the appellant around the shoulders from behind. They both fell over the porch banister and into the yard. Bystanders stated that the appellant had stabbed the deceased, and she heard appellant respond that the deceased must have fallen on the knife. Both the appellant and the appellant's mother gave essentially the same account.
Appellant said he had an old steak knife in the car that he had used to cut out part of the dashboard for mounting a tape player. He was returning the knife to the apartment when the deceased grabbed him from behind. They both fell over the banister into the yard. He got up and started into the house when a bystander exclaimed that appellant had stabbed the deceased. Appellant said he knelt over the deceased and said that he must have fallen on the knife. He then panicked and drove away. He did not know how the knife got back in his car after the stabbing.
The State's rebuttal witness, Barbara Ann Windham, testified that she saw appellant making several trips in and out of the apartment to the car and that he had a knife in his hand. She saw the appellant stab the deceased in the chest on the last trip into the apartment, and saw them fall into the yard. Other rebuttal witnesses stated that appellant did not kneel over the deceased in the yard. One said that after the stabbing, the appellant, referring to the deceased, said, 'lay there, son of a bitch,' then went into the house.
During deliberation of the jury, it was brought to the trial court's attention that a juror had telephoned a local attorney seeking some legal information. She stated to the attorney that she was on the jury in the instant case, 'and that she was holding out for an acquittal. . . .' The attorney immediately interrupted her and informed her that he could not discuss the case under any circumstances, and he reported the incident to the court.
The trial court informed the attorneys, stating Inter alia:
The State then made the following motion:
'Judge, we are going to ask you to grant a mistrial in this case and as grounds for my motion for a mistrial, the one juror who expressed this regard for your admonition yesterday afternoon not to discuss the case with anyone or allow anyone to discuss it with them or in their presence, in fact not only allowed the case to be discussed but sought out legal advice herself by calling her own attorney, Mr. Hawkins and on those grounds, we move for a mistrial this morning.'
Defense counsel then replied:
'Your Honor, please, inasmuch as the lady said she called this man but he refused to discuss it with her and she said she did not discuss it with anyone else and that she swore she did not discuss the case, so I don't think there are grounds for a mistrial.'
The trial court overruled the motion for a mistrial and the jury continued its deliberations.
Title 15, § 389, Code of Alabama 1940, requires this Court to review the record for error. The last sentence of that section states:
'. . . But the judgment of conviction must not be reversed because of error in the record, when the court is satisfied that no injury resulted therefrom to the defendant.'
Rule 45, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Duncan v. State
...verdict and then raise the matter in a motion for new trial when the verdict turns out unfavorable to the defendant. Welch v. State, 57 Ala.App. 72, 326 So.2d 137 (1976); Daniels v. State, 49 Ala.App. 654, 275 So.2d 169 (1973). The calculated silence of the appellant and his counsel amounts......