Pittman v. State
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Scott Circuit Court; Daniel Hon, Judge; 1. Instruction 4 given on the court’s own motion was erroneous and misleading. It had a tendency to cause the jury to return a verdict for a higher grade of homicide. It induced them to surrender their conviction as to- the innocence of defendant and consent to conviction under the belief his punishment would be light. 2. It is not the law. Acts 1905. § 6, p. 518.
1DissentMcCurroch, J.
I concur in the opinion expressed by this court that the trial court erred in its instruction to the jury covering the effect of a verdict of conviction. I do not think it would have been erroneous for the court in an appropriate way to have, informed the jury that the defendant, if convicted, would be transferred from the Penitentiary to the Reform School unless the trial judge should otherwise order. But, if the jury is instructed at all on this point, the law must be correctly given, and it is not proper for the court to tell the jury, in advance of conviction, what the order of the count…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Simpson v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1892
- Routt v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1896
- Darden v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1904
- Petty v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Brown v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1879
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.