Matthews v. State
Citations
- 108 Miss. 72
- 66 So. 325
Syllabus
<p>1. Homicide. Self-defense. Instructions. Good reason to believe. Reasonable' grounds to apprehend. Trial. Modification of instructions.</p> <p>Under Code 1906, section 1230, providing that the killing of a human being shall be justifiable, when committed in the lawful defense of one’s own person or any other-human being, where there shall be ■ reasonable ground to apprehend “a design to* commit a felony or to do some great personal injury,” where on a trial for murder, the court charged, on self-defense for the state, that defendant must have “good reasons to believe,” that he was in danger of death or great bodily harm at the hands of an assailant, and modified defendant’s instruction by changing the words “reasonable apprehension” o£ immediate danger, to good ground to believe, this was not reversible error, as imposing too great a burden of proof on defendant, since there is little practical difference in the meaning of the statutory words, “reasonable ground to apprehend” and the words “good reason to believe”.</p> <p>2. Criminal Law. Instructions. Self-defense.</p> <p>Where on a trial for homicide the court by modifying defendant's instructions, charged the jury that defendant’s belief, that he was in danger must have been “honestly entertained,” and in others that he must have believed “in good faith” this was not erroneous if a man believes at all he does so honestly in good faith.</p> <p>3. Criminal Law. Trial. Instructions. Modifications.</p> <p>Where an instruction as requested properly announces the law, the court should give it as requested, yet a modification by the court of the language used is not error, if such modification does not change the meaning or tend to an improper statement of the law.</p> <p>4. Criminal Law. Trial. Instructions.</p> <p>When the court has once clearly charged the jury with reference, to any principle of law which should govern it, in arriving at a verdict, it is not required to again charge the jury with reference theret
Judges: Smith
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
3 cases in this archive cite this case.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.