Stanley v. Commonwealth
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 62 — INDICTMENT APPEAL FROM CHRISTIAN CIRCUIT COURT. The law of self-defense applies to every one who kills in the apparently necessary defense of another from death or great bodily harm. It is-not confined to the relations of parent and child, husband and wife, master and servant, and brother and sister.
Read the full summary
Case 62 — INDICTMENT APPEAL FROM CHRISTIAN CIRCUIT COURT. The law of self-defense applies to every one who kills in the apparently necessary defense of another from death or great bodily harm. It is-not confined to the relations of parent and child, husband and wife, master and servant, and brother and sister. (Desty on Criminal Law,, sec. 126; Bishop’s Criminal Law, sec. 877; Wharton’s Criminal Law,, sec. 533; Gray v. Combs, 7 J. J. M., 478; McClelland v. Roy, 14 B. M., 84; Roberts v. Commonwealth, MS. Op., Court of Appeals, 1876;. Roe v. Commonwealth, 6 Law Rep., 364; Wharton on Homicide,…
1Opinion of the Court
JUDGE HOLT
delivered the opinion of the court.
The appellants, Renzy and Harmon Stanley, seek to-excuse tke killing of Rufus Ebliug, upon the ground tkat it was done by them to save the life of William Stanley, who is the brother of the one and the uncle of the other.
*441It is a general rule, that whatever a person may lawfully do in his own defense, another may do for him. Mr. Bishop, in speaking of the right to assist others in defense of person and property, says:
“ The doctrine here is that whatever one may do for himself he may do for another; * *• * * and on the whole, though distinctions have…
2Cited by28 opinions
- Springer v. CommonwealthKentucky Supreme Court · 1999
- Leeper v. StateWyoming Supreme Court · 1979
- State v. SmithOregon Supreme Court · 1903
- Foster v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Virginia · 1991
- McHargue v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1929
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.