Wilkes v. State
| Decision Date | 13 January 1927 |
| Docket Number | 6 Div. 606 |
| Citation | 215 Ala. 428,110 So. 908 |
| Parties | WILKES v. STATE. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County; H.P. Heflin, Judge.
Madden Alford Wilkes was convicted of second degree murder, and he appeals. Affirmed.
Thomas J. Roe, of Birmingham, for appellant.
Harwell G. Davis, Atty. Gen., for the State.
Defendant appellant was convicted of murder in the second degree. That defendant killed Giamalva, deceased named in the indictment was not denied. Abundant and undisputed proof showed that defendant, after careful preparation for his act, invaded the place of business where deceased was employed and, without allowing an opportunity for parley, defense, or retreat killed deceased by blowing out his brains with a shotgun and then fired other shots into his prostrate body. There was a formal plea of not guilty, but the only defense proposed by the evidence was that defendant was not guilty by reason of insanity.
Defendant sought to trace his alleged insanity to the fact that Giamalva had for a long time been unduly intimate with his wife and had more recently made a proposal to his daughter aged 15. It is not to be doubted that defendant had very good reason for a state of mind with reference to the relations between his wife and Giamalva; but insanity and irresponsibility are something else. This case does not call for any extended discussion of that subject. It is enough to say that emotional, or so-called moral, insanity, not associated with disease of the mind, as an excuse for crime has no recognition in the law of this state. Parsons v. State, 81 Ala. 577, 2 So. 854, 60 Am.Rep. 193; Boswell v. State, 63 Ala. 307, 35 Am.Rep. 20; Hall v. State, 208 Ala. 199, 94 So. 59; Kilpatrick v. State, 213 Ala. 358, 104 So. 656.
The record presents for review only a few rulings on the admissibility of evidence, and we think the case may be properly disposed of by referring to one of these only. Defendant killed deceased in June, 1925. The moving cause for his act has been stated. In September, 1924, defendant had executed a paper writing in which, in consideration of $1,000 in hand paid by Giamalva, he had acknowledged full satisfaction and discharge of all demands against Giamalva in anywise connected with the alienation of his (defendant's) wife's affections, and had agreed to leave and remain away from Jefferson county for not less than one year. This paper was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Barbour v. State
...is no recognition in the law of this state as an excuse for crime. Parsons v. State, supra [81 Ala. 577, 2 So. 854]; Wilkes v. State, supra [215 Ala. 428, 110 So. 908]; Manning v. State, supra [217 Ala. 357, 116 So. We have carefully examined the entire record and do not find therein any er......
-
Manning v. State
...plea is as was stated in Parsons v. State, 81 Ala. 577, 2 So. 854, 60 Am.Rep. 193, and adhered to in this jurisdiction. Wilkes v. State, 215 Ala. 428, 110 So. 908; Anderson v. State, 209 Ala. 36, 95 So. 171; v. State, 208 Ala. 199, 94 So. 59; Whittle v. State, 213 Ala. 301, 104 So. 668; Lam......
-
Naugher v. State
...463, 4 So. 279, 5 Am.St.Rep. 384; Story v. State, 160 Ala. 100, 49 So. 753; Vacalis v. State, 17 Ala.App. 521, 86 So. 89; Wilkes v. State, 215 Ala. 428, 110 So. 908; Manning v. State, 217 Ala. 357, 116 So. The bill of exceptions recites "During the closing argument of solicitor Bailes, he m......
-
Johnson v. State
...mania, usually due to causes such as intoxication, not associated with disease of the mind does not constitute insanity. Wilkes v. State, 215 Ala. 428, 110 So. 908; Manning v. State, 217 Ala. 357, 116 So. 360; Grant v. State. 250 Ala. 164, 33 So.2d 466; Lakey v. State, 258 Ala. 116, 61 So.2......