Prine v. State

Citations

• 73 Miss. 838

Syllabus

<p>1. Criminal JOaw. Assault with intent to hill. Evidence.</p> <p>When, on a trial for assault with intent to kill, it is not clear who was the aggressor, it is error to exclude testimony offered by the accused to the effect that, on the day of the difficulty, the person shot wanted to swap knives with the witness, so as to secure one with a longer blade, informing the witness that he was going to have a row with the accused that day and asking him to stick to him, and that there was only one man in the world whom he wanted to kill, and that was the accused, for these facts, though not communicated to the accused, tend to show whether or not he acted in self-defense, as he claimed to have done.</p> <p>S. Same. Right of self-defense. Use of deadly weapon. Instructions.</p> <p>The right to use a deadly weapon in self-defense is not denied to an accused person, unless he was the originator of the difficulty, entered it armed, and brought it on, intending, if necessary, to use his weapon to overcome his adversary, and it is error to grant instructions for the state conflicting with this view of the law.</p> <p>3. Instructions. Hypothetical instruction. Omission of material facts. An instruction stating an hypothetical case is erroneous that singles out certain parts of the evidence for prominent presentation and omits other parts favorable to the accused.</p>