State v. Hicks
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Crawford Circuit Court. I. The law of the case was fairly presented to the jury. (State y. Hays, 23 Mo. 318.) The fifth, sixth and seventh instructions asked by the defendant were not the law; they were not warranted by the evidence. The temper and disposition of the deceased were not involved in the prosecution. (Whart. Crim.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Crawford Circuit Court. I. The law of the case was fairly presented to the jury. (State y. Hays, 23 Mo. 318.) The fifth, sixth and seventh instructions asked by the defendant were not the law; they were not warranted by the evidence. The temper and disposition of the deceased were not involved in the prosecution. (Whart. Crim. Law, 296; Whart. on Horn. 249 ; Wright v. State, 9 Yerg. 344; State v. Hawley, 4 Harring. 562.) The defendant was not prejudiced by the instructions. (7 Mo. 416; 8 Mo. 224; 3 Grah. & Wat. on New Trials, 717.)
1Opinion of the CourtRichardson, Judge
The defendant was indicted, tried and convicted of murder in the first degree. On the trial the court gave several instructions, among which is the following: “ The court fur. ther instructs the jury that malice in its legal sense denotes a wrongful act done intentionally without just cause or excuse ; and it is not necessary, in order to support an indictment for murder in the first degree, to show that the act of killing was intentional and done without any justifiable cause.”
This instruction is so palpably wrong that it requires no comment to expose it. To constitute murder in the first…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Horbach v. StateTexas Supreme Court · 1875
- State v. . TurpinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1877
- State v. KennadeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- State v. FeeleySupreme Court of Missouri · 1906
- State v. KeeneSupreme Court of Missouri · 1872
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.