State v. Burns
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Pemiscot Circuit Court. — Eon. Sterling H. McCarty, Judge. (1) Tiie giving of the concluding portion of instruction 1 was error. As the shooting was detailed by eyewitnesses, there was no room for presumptions. State v. Solan, 207 S. W. 783; State v. Frame, 204 S. W. 10; State v. Willard, 192 S. W. 439; State v. Swearengin, 269 Mo. 186. (2) Instruction 2, on self-defense, is erroneous.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Pemiscot Circuit Court. — Eon. Sterling H. McCarty, Judge. (1) Tiie giving of the concluding portion of instruction 1 was error. As the shooting was detailed by eyewitnesses, there was no room for presumptions. State v. Solan, 207 S. W. 783; State v. Frame, 204 S. W. 10; State v. Willard, 192 S. W. 439; State v. Swearengin, 269 Mo. 186. (2) Instruction 2, on self-defense, is erroneous. State v. Rapp, 142 Mo. 447; State v. Hopper, 142 Mo. 482; State v. Walters, 356 Mo. 134; State v. Higgerson, 157 Mo. 401; State v. Patterson, 159 Mo. 561; State v. Garrett, 170 Mo. 897; State v.…
1Opinion of the Court
WHITE, C.
The appellant on a trial in the Circuit Court of Pemiscot County was convicted of murder in the second degree, and appealed. One A. P. Bumpas was the victim of the homicide. The trouble between the two men arose out of the defendant’s alleged attentions to the wife of Bumpas.
Mrs. Bumpas had charge of the post office at the town of Cooter in Pemiscot County. The defendant, Burns, was a mail carrier, and his route lay through Cooter, where the homicide occurred September 27, 1917. He carried the mail in his automobile. The two families of Bumpas and Burns were on friendly terms; and…
2Cited by12 opinions
- State v. CreightonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1932
- State v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1935
- State v. MaloneSupreme Court of Missouri · 1931
- State v. MartinSupreme Court of Missouri · 1953
- State v. BongardSupreme Court of Missouri · 1932
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.