State v. McCallister

Citations

• 23 Del. 301
• 7 Penne. 301
• 76 A. 226
• 1909 Del. LEXIS 11

Syllabus

<p>Criminal Law—Indictment—Malicious Mischief—Demurrer— Malice, how Shown—Joint Defendant; Statements of— ■ ■ Evidence—Statute—Accomplice.-</p> <p>1. Demurrer to an indictment for malicious mischief overruled.</p> <p>2. Malicious mischief is a common law offense, and may be defined to be, any malicious or mischievious injury, either to the rights of another, or to those of the public in general. It includes all malicious physical injuries to the rights of another, which impair utility, or materially diminish value.</p> <p>3. Malice is a necessary ingredient of such offense, but is not confined specifically to the owner of the property destroyed or injured. Wilful or wanton cruelty or injury to, or destruction of property, committed under such circumstances as to indicate a malignant spirit of mischief, is sufficient to constitute the offense.</p> <p>4. Malice may be shown by proof of wilful and wanton acts, or it may be inferred from attendant facts and circumstances.</p> <p>5. The declarations of one joint defendant, as to statements made by the other will not of themselves bind the other unless made in his presence or by his authority.</p> <p>6. When the malicious mischief charged, consists in the cutting down of telegraph poles, resistance made to the erection of other poles because the arms would extend beyond the limits of the highway and over the defendant’s farm, would not, as an independent fact, if made in good faith, warrant the inference of defendant’s guilt. But such resistance may be considered by the jury, with the other evidence, in determining the question of the innocence or guilt of the accused.</p> <p>7. The law respecting accomplice, circumstantial evidence, conflicting evidence and reasonable doubt, stated.</p>