State v. Anderson

Citations

• 121 La. 366
• 46 So. 357
• 1908 La. LEXIS 680

Syllabus

<p>1. Assault — Willfully Shooting at Another — Instructions—Evidence — Intent —Special Instruction.</p> <p>The statement of the trial judge in his special charge, instructing the jury that the marksmanship of the defendant, whether skillful or bad, was not pertinent, was not good ground to set aside the verdict, so long as the shooting was intentional and was within range.</p> <p>The court instructed the jury that it must appear, in order to convict, that the shooting was done willfully, deliberately, intentionally, with a bad purpose.</p> <p>It was for the jury to determine, after having received proper instructions regarding the law of the case, whether the facts showed that under ordinary circumstances the ball in the pistol would never have reached the person alleged as the person shot at.</p> <p>The instruction regarding required “intent” was fully given, and left the defendant without good ground to complain of the remark relating to marksmanship.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — Eor cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 4, Assault and Battery, §§ 82, 141, 147.]</p> <p>2. Criminal Law — Instructions—Flight of Defendant.</p> <p>According to the court’s statement, made part of the bill of exceptions, the flight of the defendant was an issue of the case. Taking the statement as correct, the instruction given was unobjectionable.</p> <p>Even if it be as stated in part of the bill, with which the court did not agree, the defendant had no ground upon which to stand.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 14, Criminal Law, §§ 1980-1985.]</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>