Williams v. State
| Decision Date | 12 October 1898 |
| Parties | WILLIAMS . v. STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Abusive Language—Provocation—Question for Jury.
Wrongfully entering and taking possession of the place of business of another in his absence, remaining in possession until his return, and refusing to leave when requested to do so by him, may or may not amount to such provocation as will justify the owner in using to the wrongdoer, upon his refusal to leave, opprobrious words and abusive language tending to cause a breach of the peace. On the trial of an indictment against the owner for using language of the character above referred to, itshould be left to the jury to determine whether or not, in their judgment, the circumstances were such as to justify the accused.
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Error from superior court, Coffee county; J. L. Sweat, Judge.
Isham Williams was convicted of using abusive language, and brings error. Reversed.
Quincey & McDonald, for plaintiff in error.
John W. Bennett, Sol. Gen., for the State.
The accused was indicted under that section of the Penal Code which declares that "any person who shall, without provocation, use to, or of, another, and in his presence, opprobrious words or abusive language, tending to cause a breach of the peace, " shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Pen. Code, § 396. It appeared from the evidence that the prosecutor was summoned by the marshal of the town to aid in the arrest of the accused, who was charged with a violation of a city ordinance; that the prosecutor went to the place of business of the accused, —a livery stable, —and, as he claimed, by direction of the sheriff, who had a warrant charging the accused with an offense against the state, took charge of the stable in the absence of the accused; that the accused, coming in shortly thereafter, found the prosecutor in possession of the stable, with a hatchet in his hand. Accused asked the prosecutor what he was doing there, and told him to leave, which prosecutor refused to do, whereupon the accused used the opprobrious language which is alleged in the indictment. It appeared that after the words were used the prosecutor closed up the stable of the accused and nailed boards across the door. From the statement of the prisoner it appeared that when he ordered prosecutor to leave the stable his refusal to do so was accompanied with the use of profane language. The judge charged the jury, in effect, that under the evidence there was no provocation given by the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wiggins v. State
... ... in his presence, tending to cause a breach of the peace (Pen ... Code 1910, § 387), is a question for the jury. Dyer v. State, ... supra; Collins v. State, 78 Ga. 87, 88; Meaders ... v. State, 96 Ga. 299, 300, 22 S.E. 527; Williams v ... State, 105 Ga. 608, 31 S.E. 738; Echols v ... State, 110 Ga. 257, 34 S.E. 289; Hanson v ... State, 114 Ga. 104, 39 S.E. 942; Dowling v. State, 7 ... Ga.App. 613, 67 S.E. 697(1); Hamilton v. State, 9 ... Ga.App. 402, 71 S.E. 593. Whether or not the provocation ... was adequate being ... ...
-
Jackson v. State
...Dowling v. State, 7 Ga. App. 613, 67 S. E. 697; Echols v. State, 110 Ga. 257, 34 S. E. 289; Collins v. State, 78 Ga. 88; Williams v. State, 105 Ga. 608, 31 S. E. 738; and citations. Judgment ...
-
Fish v. State
...within the meaning of the statute, and that a given set of facts would not be a sufficient provocation for their use. Williams v. State, 31 S. E. 738, 105 Ga. 608; Echols v. State, 34 S. E. 289, 110 Ga. 257; Hanson v. State, 39 S. E. 942, 114 Ga. 104. [Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol.......