State v. Howell
Supreme Court of South Carolina
The appellant, a police officer of Peak’s, a village in Lexington County, together with one John Hipp, were indicted for aggravated assault and battery upon the person of A. M. VVallace, the prosecutor. The defendants offered no testimony. The charge of the presiding judge was as follows: Gentlemen, the facts of this case are, as it were, in a “nutshell.”
Read the full summary
The appellant, a police officer of Peak’s, a village in Lexington County, together with one John Hipp, were indicted for aggravated assault and battery upon the person of A. M. VVallace, the prosecutor. The defendants offered no testimony. The charge of the presiding judge was as follows: Gentlemen, the facts of this case are, as it were, in a “nutshell.” You are not at liberty to guess anything; you are not at liberty to imagine anything; you are not at liberty to suppose anything that witnesses who are not here would have testified to. You, I, and all of us are confined to such facts as are…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Mr. Chief Justice Simpson.
The question upon which this appeal turns is, Avhether his honor, the Circuit Judge, transcended in his charge the constitutional limit prescribed in art. IV., section 26, of the Constitution, Avhich provides: “That judges shall not charge juries in respect to matters of fact, but may state the testimony and declare the law.” We have construed this section to mean (State v. Jenkins, 21 S. C., 595; Woody v. Dean, 24 S. C., 503), that while trial judges may state the testimony and so arrange it as to enable the jury to apply it…
2Cited by4 opinions
- State v. SowellSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1910
- State v. PruittSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1938
- Haynes v. GrahamSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1940
- State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1910