People v. Heikkala

Defendant, on exceptions before sentence, challenges the validity of his conviction of manslaughter on two grounds, that a verdict of guilty ought not to have been directed, and that, being so requested, the judge ought to have instructed the jury relative to the presumption, of innocence.

The charge was laid under 3 Comp. Laws 1915, § 15234:

“Any person who shall maim or injure any other person by the discharge of any fire-arm pointed or aimed, intentionally but without malice, at any such person, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and shall be punished by a fine of not less than fifty dollars,…