Carter v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Carter v. State

87 S.E.2d 655, 92 Ga. App. 68, 1955 Ga. App. LEXIS 523

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 20, 1955

Docket35699

StatusPublished

This text of 87 S.E.2d 655 (Carter v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Carter v. State, 87 S.E.2d 655, 92 Ga. App. 68, 1955 Ga. App. LEXIS 523 (Ga. Ct. App. 1955).

Pincite

Opinion

Townsend, J.

1. “In all cases of voluntary manslaughter, there must be some actual assault upon the person killing, or an attempt by the person killed to commit a serious personal injury on the person killing, or other equivalent circumstances to justify the excitement of passion and to exclude all idea of deliberation or malice, either express or implied. . . The killing must be the result of that sudden, violent impulse of passion supposed to be irresistible.” Code § 26-1007.

2. A homicide is not justified where committed merely to prevent a serious personal injury not amounting to a felony upon the person killing. Code § 26-1011; Battle v. State, 103 Ga. 53 (4) (29 S. E. 491); Williams v. McCranie, 27 Ga. App. 693 (2) (109 S. E. 699).

3. Where, on an indictment for the offense of murder, the jury, by believing certain parts only of the defendant’s statement and combining those parts with certain parts only of the evidence in the case, would be authorized to conclude that the killing was manslaughter, rather than, murder as contended by the State, or justifiable homicide as contended by the defendant, a verdict finding the defendant guilty of manslaughter is not contrary to law. Echols v. State, 87 Ga. App. 399 (3) (74 S. E. 2d 128); Goldsmith v. State, 54 Ga. App. 268 (187 S. E. 694); Grimes v. State, 123 Ga. 754 (1) (51 S. E. 721).

3. Applying the foregoing rules of law to the instant case, the jury hern was authorized to find that the defendant had made previous threats against the deceased; that, at the time of the homicide, the deceased provoked a quarrel with the defendant- and the defendant procured a pistol; that the deceased then drew a knife on the defendant and advanced upon her for the purpose of committing the offense of slabbing, which offense is less than a felony; and that, before the deceased was in striking distance, the defendant in a sudden and violent heat of [69]*69passion fired upon and killed the assailant, her husband. There was accordingly some evidence authorizing the jury to find the defendant guilty of the crime of voluntary manslaughter, and the trial court did not err in so charging, as complained of in the special grounds of the motion for a new trial. Cf. McDaniel v. State, 209 Ga. 827 (76 S. E. 2d 500); s. c., 91 Ga. App. 196 (85 S. E. 2d 490).

Decided May 20, 1955. Robert B. Williamson, for plaintiff in error. W. J. Forehand, Solicitor-General, contra.

The verdict was authorized by the evidence, and the trial court did not err in denying the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Gardner, P. J., and Carlisle, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Townsend, J.

1. “In all cases of voluntary manslaughter, there must be some actual assault upon the person killing, or an attempt by the person killed to commit a serious personal injury on the person killing, or other equivalent circumstances to justify the excitement of passion and to exclude all idea of deliberation or malice, either express or implied. . . The killing must be the result of that sudden, violent impulse of passion supposed to be irresistible.” Code § 26-1007.

2. A homicide is not justified where committed merely to prevent a serious personal injury not amounting to a felony upon the person killing. Code § 26-1011; Battle v. State, 103 Ga. 53 (4) (29 S. E. 491); Williams v. McCranie, 27 Ga. App. 693 (2) (109 S. E. 699).

3. Where, on an indictment for the offense of murder, the jury, by believing certain parts only of the defendant’s statement and combining those parts with certain parts only of the evidence in the case, would be authorized to conclude that the killing was manslaughter, rather than, murder as contended by the State, or justifiable homicide as contended by the defendant, a verdict finding the defendant guilty of manslaughter is not contrary to law. Echols v. State, 87 Ga. App. 399 (3) (74 S. E. 2d 128); Goldsmith v. State, 54 Ga. App. 268 (187 S. E. 694); Grimes v. State, 123 Ga. 754 (1) (51 S. E. 721).

3. Applying the foregoing rules of law to the instant case, the jury hern was authorized to find that the defendant had made previous threats against the deceased; that, at the time of the homicide, the deceased provoked a quarrel with the defendant- and the defendant procured a pistol; that the deceased then drew a knife on the defendant and advanced upon her for the purpose of committing the offense of slabbing, which offense is less than a felony; and that, before the deceased was in striking distance, the defendant in a sudden and violent heat of [69]*69passion fired upon and killed the assailant, her husband. There was accordingly some evidence authorizing the jury to find the defendant guilty of the crime of voluntary manslaughter, and the trial court did not err in so charging, as complained of in the special grounds of the motion for a new trial. Cf. McDaniel v. State, 209 Ga. 827 (76 S. E. 2d 500); s. c., 91 Ga. App. 196 (85 S. E. 2d 490).

Decided May 20, 1955. Robert B. Williamson, for plaintiff in error. W. J. Forehand, Solicitor-General, contra.

The verdict was authorized by the evidence, and the trial court did not err in denying the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Gardner, P. J., and Carlisle, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

87 S.E.2d 655, 92 Ga. App. 68, 1955 Ga. App. LEXIS 523, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carter-v-state-gactapp-1955.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack