State v. Davis

Citations

• 72 Wash. 261
• 130 P. 95
• 1913 Wash. LEXIS 1444

Syllabus

<p>Assault — Aggravated Assault — Evidence—Sufficiency. A conviction. for second degree assault upon conflicting evidence is sustained, where there was testimony to the effect that the accused made a sudden assault with a shoe knife to avenge a grievance of his younger brother, while the prosecuting witness was unarmed and at a disadvantage.</p> <p>Same — Elements of Offense — Grievous Bodily Harm — Question for Jury. Under the statute making the inflicting of grievous bodily harm upon another an essential element of assault in the second degree, the question is one of fact for the jury and not of law for the court, and it is error for the court to determine the same in its instructions.</p> <p>Criminal Law — Trial—Instructions—Presumptions as to Natural and Probable Consequences. Tlie presumption that the accused intended the natural and prohable consequences of his acts does not extend beyond the actual consequences; and where the wounded person recovered from an attack that was likely to produce death, it is error to instruct the jury that they could presume that the attack was made with intent to kill, if death was the usual and ordinary result of the defendant’s voluntary acts.</p> <p>Assault — Aggravated Assault — Evidence — Materiality. In a prosecution for aggravated assault, inflicted to avenge a grievance of the accused’s brother, to which the accused was not a witness and had only second-hand information, it is proper to exclude evidence of the altercation with prosecuting witness constituting the brother’s grievance, as the same is immaterial.</p>