McCombs v. State

43 So. 965, 151 Ala. 7, 1907 Ala. LEXIS 472
Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided May 9, 1907·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

ANDEBSON, J.

Elizabeth Moore, who was cut by the defendant, testified as to the cutting, and that they had no previous difficulty; nor did she say they Avere having one at the time of the cutting — the inference being that the defendant cut her without cause or provocation. The defendant’s evidence showed that Elizabeth Moore and “Francis” Avere beating her with sticks at the time of the cutting, and that there Avas but one difficulty. The defendant should have been permitted, upon cross-examination of the state’s Avitness, to show that she Avas engaged in a fight with Elizabeth and Francis, and to bring out all facts connected with the cutting, which may have been part of the res gestae

It appears from the bill of exceptions that charges 1, 2, 3, -4, 5, and 6, requested by the defendant, Avere all upon the same, slip of paper, and were refused in bulk by the trial court; and the action of the court in so refusing Avas proper, unless all the charges were good. It is sufficient to say that charge 1 was bad. It Avas elliptical; but, if not bad for that reason, it pretermitted all the elements of self-defense, other than freedom from fault in bringing on the difficulty. — Pearson v. State, 115 Ala. 115, 22 South. 502.

The other charges requested by the defendant are manifestly bad, and Avere properly refused.

[10] For tlie error above designated, the judgment of the circuit court is reversed, and the cause is remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

Tyson, C. J., and Dowdell and McClellan, JJ., concur.

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

McCombs v. State, 43 So. 965, 151 Ala. 7, 1907 Ala. LEXIS 472 (Ala. 1907).

43 So. 965 (McCombs v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Burk v. State
75 So. 702 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1917)
Anderson v. Anniston Electric & Gas Co.
66 So. 925 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1914)
Chestnut v. State
61 So. 609 (Alabama Court of Appeals, 1913)