Winton v. State
| Decision Date | 21 February 1925 |
| Citation | 268 S.W. 633,151 Tenn. 177 |
| Parties | WINTON v. STATE. |
| Court | Tennessee Supreme Court |
Error to Circuit Court, Wilson County; J. M. Gardenhire, Judge.
Clayton Winton was convicted of murder in the first degree, and he brings error. Reversed and new trial granted.
W. H Swiggart, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
Clayton Winton, a colored boy, 20 years of age, hereinafter referred to as the defendant, shot and killed John Oakley, a deputy sheriff, on the night of December the 30th, 1922, at the home of his parents about one mile north of Watertown, in Wilson county.
Defendant was indicted for murder in the first degree, and was put to trial at the April, 1923, term of the criminal court.
The jury being unable to agree, a mistrial was entered, and he was again put to trial at the January, 1924, term, when the jury found him guilty of murder in the first degree with mitigating circumstances, and fixed his punishment at imprisonment in the state penitentiary for a period of 25 years.
His motions for a new trial and in arrest of judgment having been overruled, he prayed and was granted an appeal to this court and, through counsel, has filed 19 assignments of error, the first 5 of which question the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a conviction for murder in the first degree.
According to the evidence the defendant had always borne a good reputation; had never been in any trouble before, and for about two years preceding the homicide had been making his home in Lebanon attending school. In the mornings and afternoons he worked about the homes of several prominent citizens of Lebanon, and in that way earned money with which to educate himself. These parties gave him a good name.
His father and mother, George and Nolie Winton, lived in a negro settlement in the suburbs of Watertown, which is 12 miles from Lebanon. George was a confirmed drunkard, and was worthless and trifling. According to the record, Nolie was a woman of good character, and by her industry had bought her home and supported herself by taking in washing. Her dwelling house faced south and was 10 or 12 feet from the street or road. It had a front and back porch, and a hallway connecting the two porches, and there were two rooms on each side thereof. The shooting occurred in the southwest room of this dwelling, which was 14 feet square.
On the night of December the 29th, 1922, the defendant had gone by train from Lebanon to Watertown to spend a few days with his mother. His father spent that night in his home, but left early the next morning, and, so far as the record shows, has not been seen in Watertown since that time.
It also appears that on December the 29th the grand jury of Wilson county found an indictment against George for public drunkenness, and on that day Oakley advised Sheriff Reeves that George was preparing to leave. On the same day that the indictment was found, Reeves had the clerk to issue a capias for George, and Reeves testified that he mailed same to Oakley on the afternoon of the 29th, and in due course of mail, Oakley should have received same that night or the next day. But it does not appear from the record that Oakley actually received said capias, or that he had same with him when he went to the home of the defendant for the purpose of arresting his father.
A little after dark on the evening of the 30th, Oakley procured Will Luck, who was marshall of Watertown, and a mechanic by the name of W. J. Hooberry to go with him to the Winton home for the purpose of placing George under arrest.
When within about 130 yards of said home, Oakley and his associates saw the defendant with two boys, and heard him say, "I have forgotten something," and thereupon turned and walked back to his home. The two boys, with whom the defendant was standing when he was observed by the officers, were introduced by the defendant, and both of them testified that they saw the three officers and recognized them.
Luck admits that it was dark at the time, and that they were not on the street upon which the defendant's home was located (which runs east and west), but were on a street that intersected same, which runs north and south.
The defendant admits the circumstances set forth above, and admits that he saw the three men, but claims that he did not recognize them on account of it being dark, although he knew them and knew that they were officers, and says that their presence had nothing to do with his sudden determination to return to his home. He testified that he went back home to call "Boston," but does not show that "Boston" lived at his home, nor that he had any reason to expect to find "Boston" in his home. In fact he was not questioned about this one way or the other.
He further testified that, upon arriving at his home, he was persuaded by his mother to remain at home with her because of the absence of his father; that he then got his pistol and proceeded to the front porch for the purpose of firing it as a Christmas celebration, when he saw Hooberry at the front gate, which caused him to re-enter the house without shooting his pistol.
When the party of officers reached the home of defendant, Luck and Oakley went around to the back of the house, leaving Hooberry at the front gate. Hooberry testified that the defendant came to the front door and opened it with his hand in his right overcoat pocket, the pocket in which the defendant admits that he had the pistol with which he subsequently killed Oakley; that the defendant's mother followed him to the door and said to him: "There is two men at the back door; go let them in, and don't act the fool."
Luck testified that Oakley knocked on the rear door of the home, and that he then heard the voices of the defendant and his mother in the hallway, but did not understand what was said by them; that the defendant opened the door, and Oakley asked him if his father were there, receiving a negative reply; that Oakley told the defendant he wanted to see him, and thereupon the defendant and his mother led them through the hall and into the front room, where the shooting occurred.
Luck's statement as to what happened after they entered the room is as follows:
"Q. When you got in the room, Mr. Luck, just go ahead and tell in your own way what was said by the defendant, and what Mr. Oakley said, and tell what occurred. Talk out loud so the jury can hear you.
A. Mr. Oakley went in front of me, and they led the way into the room. Winton stepped out towards, kinder in front of the fireplace, maybe 4 or 5 feet out there, and Mr. Oakley stepped over towards the grate and his mother. Right at the right, as you go in the door, there is a little closet there, and she stands by that, and I still stands just inside of the door. The door was standing open at the left as you come in.
Q. You mean the door leading from the hall opened into the room so that when you turned it back it went back to the left?
A. And I went back to the left as you go in. Just to the right of this door is a closet, on the right hand side, with a door that forms a part of the wall, and the fireplace is in the rest of the wall there.
Q. Go ahead.
A. I walked just in front of the door, and his mother was standing kinder to the back of me, kinder to the right and back of me, out from the closet door a piece. Mr. Oakley asked them if George was there again, and they said he wasn't there. He told them he had a warrant for him and Clayton asked him if he had a search warrant. He said: 'No; I haven't a search warrant; I don't need any search warrant.' Mr. Oakley was standing kinder just a little bit, not exactly in front of the fireplace, some where close to it; I don't know the exact position; and he reached around, he was facing the south talking, and Clayton Winton was in front of him, and he reached around with his left hand to pull that closet door open to see if George was in there, and Clayton jumped back. He had his hand in his right-hand overcoat pocket, and jumped back in an angry mood towards the rear of the house, and his mother holloed.
Q. You said to the rear of the house?
A. He backed back towards the back.
Q. Backed back towards the south?
A. Yes, sir; and his mother said: 'Don't do that, Clayton, don't do that'; and about that time he had already fired, and Mr. Oakley, I seen him scrambling, and he jumped back into a position in front of the place about the time he fired, maybe he had got in position by the time he fired, and that is when the firing started. Mr. Oakley shot as quickly as he got his position to shoot.
Q. How long was it Mr. Luck, from the time Winton fired until you saw Mr. Oakley's pistol, if you did see it?
A. It was under those circumstances there, it was pretty critical time, and I couldn't hardly tell. It was as quick as a man of his age could get his gun out and shoot. It was all done in a few seconds.
Q. It was all right together?
A. Yes, sir; it was all right together.
Q. When you saw Winton's pistol, what did you do then?
A. When he pulled his pistol out and fired at Mr. Oakley, I pulled out mine and fired at him.
Q. How many times did you shoot, Mr. Luck?
A. Twice.
Q. How many times did Winton shoot, if you know?
A. He must have shot three or four times; I can't be positive as to that.
Q. How many times did Mr. Oakley shoot?
A. I think that he shot three times."
Cross-examination:
"Q. You said it was dark in there?
A. There was a little lamp on the table.
Q. It wasn't dark?
A. You know what kind of a light a small lamp will give in a room.
Q. It was not as visible as it would have been had there been a better light; that is what you mean?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. This boy came and answered the knock?
A. Yes, sir.
Q...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Preece
... ... 912; State v. Dugan (1879) 1 Houst. Cr. Cas ... (Del.) 563; State v. Bartmess (1898) 33 Or. 110, 54 ... P. 167; State v. Cannon (1898) 52 S.C. 452, 30 S.E ... 589; State v. Bradley (1923) 126 S.C. 528, 533, 120 ... S.E. 240; State v. Foutch (1895) 96 Tenn. 242, 34 ... S.W. 1, and Winton v. State (1925) 151 Tenn. 177, ... 189, 268 S.W. 633 ... In ... spite of the confusion that exists in the record with ... reference to a description of the apartment building, there ... can be but little doubt that from the standpoint of both fact ... and law, Preece was in ... ...
-
Drye v. State
... ... [184 S.W.2d 13] ... which is an essential characteristic of murder in the first ... We turn ... for painstaking consideration of the distinguishing, ... essential elements of first degree murder to two leading ... cases, Rader v. State, 73 Tenn. 610, and Winton ... v. State, 151 Tenn. 177, 268 S.W. 633. In both, ... convictions of murder in the first degree were reversed, it ... being held, as expressed in the Rader case, 'that the ... purpose to kill was formed and executed in passion, and that ... there was not that cool, deliberate premeditation ... ...
-
Wooten v. State
... ... reason of an ordinary man and induce him, under such ... excitement and passion, to strike the blow that causes the ... death of the deceased, this will reduce the killing to ... manslaughter." Toler v. State, 152 Tenn. 1, at ... page 13, 260 S.W. 134, 137. In Winton v. State, 151 ... Tenn. 177, 268 S.W. 633, this court recognized that unlawful ... invasion of the home, although unaccompanied by a threat of ... personal violence, is calculated to excite anger, equivalent ... to passion, and afford reasonable provocation therefor. Mr ... Wharton, in his ... ...