Powell v. State

Citations

• 67 Miss. 119

Syllabus

<p>1. Criminal Law. Homicide. Parental correction, causing death.</p> <p>A parent cannot deliberately inflict such punishment on his child of tender years as will likely produce death and yet escape criminal responsibility under cover of authority to correct in moderation.</p> <p>2. Same. Cruel punishment. Death of child. Intent,</p> <p>On a trial for murder, a father, guilty of the cruel and immoderate beating of his child eight years of age, which results in death, is not entitled to an instruction that the jury, before convicting the accused of murder, must believe that at the time of the chastisement he had in mind a wilful and deliberate purpose to kill.</p> <p>3. Same. Instructions as to intent.</p> <p>In such case the defendant cannot complain of the modification of his instructions on the subject of intent, if the charges as modified instruct the jury that, although the accused may have killed the deceased without legal excuse, before convicting him of murder they must “further believe from the evidence, beyond any reasonable doubt, that the correction of the deceased was excessive, cruel, unusual, evidently dangerous, and likely to kill or produce great bodily harm.”</p> <p>4. Indictment for Murder. Instruction as to manslaughter.</p> <p>If in such case the defendant obtains an instruction to the efFect that, although the deceased may have been killed without legal excuse, yet, if no deadly weapon was used and the chastisement was not evidently dangerous and likely to kill or produce great bodily harm, the jury should find the defendant guilty of only manslaughter, the law of manslaughter is fairly presented to the jury.</p> <p>5. Same. Child of tender years. Motive immaterial, when.</p> <p>On the trial of a father who, in administering punishment, cruelly beats his child of tender years to death, it is proper for the court to refuse to instruct the jury that the absence of motive to kill is a circumstance favorable to the accused.</p>