Rowell v. State

Mississippi Supreme Court

Rowell v. State

116 So. 532, 150 Miss. 133, 1928 Miss. LEXIS 119

CourtMississippi Supreme Court

DecidedApril 9, 1928

DocketNo. 26974.

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 116 So. 532 (Rowell v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Mississippi Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rowell v. State, 116 So. 532, 150 Miss. 133, 1928 Miss. LEXIS 119 (Mich. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

Smith, C. J.

The state’s tenth instruction, while inaccurately worded, viewed in connection with the other instructions, could not have misled the jury.

The state’s eleventh instruction, which defines malice as “the doing of a wrong act intentionally, without just cause or excuse,” is erroneous in that malice is a state of mind and not an act; but it was perfectly harmless, for “the doing of a wrong act intentionally, without just cause or excuse,” evidences malice.

Some of the other instructions complained of are inaccurate when considered alone, but the errors therein disappear when they are considered along with the other instructions.

The testimony as to the striking of Floyd Alpin by Hatcher Rowell after the deceased was cut by the appellant may have been inadmissible; but if it was, it *138 could not have prejudiced- the appellant to an extent sufficient to justify a reversal.

The testimony of Houston Busby here complained of was admissible.

Affirmed.

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