Henderson v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama

Henderson v. State

77 Ala. 77

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedDecember 15, 1884

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 77 Ala. 77 (Henderson v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Henderson v. State, 77 Ala. 77 (Ala. 1884).

Pincite

Opinion

STONE, C. J.

Charges four and five, asked for defendant, were severally refused, and the defendant excepted severally. Each is faulty. A conspiracy to take life, and an attempt to carry it into effect, do not, without more, justify the taking of the iife of the person thus attempting. Such attempt, to justify a killing, must be attended with an actual or seeming ability to carry it into effect; and the danger must be, or appear to be, so imminent, as thatit can not be otherwise eluded, or, at least, can not be without exposing the party assailed to increased peril, by flight, or other attempted escape. Life must not be taken, except in extreme cases, when there is no other apparent means of escape from what appears to be imminent peril to life or limb. Less than this does not meet the conditions of self-defense. — Mitchell v. The State, 60 Ala. 26 ; DeArman v. The State, 71 Ala. 351; Storey v. The State, Ib. 329. The fifth charge asked pretermits all mention of other modes of escape, which may have been open to defendant, and which it was his duty to have resorted to, if available, before taking life.

Affirmed.

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

STONE, C. J.

Charges four and five, asked for defendant, were severally refused, and the defendant excepted severally. Each is faulty. A conspiracy to take life, and an attempt to carry it into effect, do not, without more, justify the taking of the iife of the person thus attempting. Such attempt, to justify a killing, must be attended with an actual or seeming ability to carry it into effect; and the danger must be, or appear to be, so imminent, as thatit can not be otherwise eluded, or, at least, can not be without exposing the party assailed to increased peril, by flight, or other attempted escape. Life must not be taken, except in extreme cases, when there is no other apparent means of escape from what appears to be imminent peril to life or limb. Less than this does not meet the conditions of self-defense. — Mitchell v. The State, 60 Ala. 26 ; DeArman v. The State, 71 Ala. 351; Storey v. The State, Ib. 329. The fifth charge asked pretermits all mention of other modes of escape, which may have been open to defendant, and which it was his duty to have resorted to, if available, before taking life.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

77 Ala. 77, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/henderson-v-state-ala-1884.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack