State v. Powell
Citations
- 21 Del. 24
- 5 Penne. 24
- 61 A. 966
- 1904 Del. LEXIS 18
Syllabus
<p>Criminal Law—Homicide—Murder—Malice—Self-Defense—Confessions — Adulterous Conduct of Deceased with Prisoner’s Husband—No Justification for Killing the Deceased— Evidence — Photographs of Body of Deceased— Threats of Deceased Not Communicated to Prisoner—Credibility of Witness— Character Evidence.</p> <p>1. In a trial for murder, photographs of the body of the deceased offered by the State for the purpose of showing the condition of the body in respect to the size and location of the wounds inflicted, are admissible in evidence. The fact that the defendant admits the location and character of the wounds does not make the photographs immaterial.</p> <p>2. In such a trial where the plea of self-defense is relied upon the defendant may show prior threats made by the deceased against the defendant although they were not communicated to the defendant. It may also be shown that the deceased requested the witness to say nothing about the threats to anybody.</p> <p>3. The prior conviction of a witness for carrying concealed a deadly weapon will not be admitted to affect the credibility of the witness.</p> <p>4. Murder of the first degree, murder of the second degree and manslaughter, defined. The law respecting malice and self-defense, stated.</p> <p>5. Wherever the fatal act is done deliberately, or without adequate cause, the law presumes that it was done with malice, and the burden is on the prisoner to show from the evidence, or by inference irom the circumstances of the case, that the act was not done with malice. All homicides with a deadly weapon are presumed to be malicious until the contrary appears by the evidence, and the burden of proof to the contrary lies upon the accused.</p> <p>6. If the jury are satisfied from the evidence that the deceased first attacked the prisoner, and that from the character of such attack the prisoner had reasonable cause to believe, and did believe, that he was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm, and that he had no ot
Judges: Spruance
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCites
14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Stokes v. . People of the State of N.Y.New York Court of Appeals· 1873-06-10· cited 180×
- People v. ScogginsCalifornia Supreme Court· 1869-07-01· cited 65×
- Campbell v. PeopleIllinois Supreme Court· 1854-11-15· cited 64×
- Wiggins v. PeopleSupreme Court· 1876-12-22· cited 50×
- People v. ThomsonCalifornia Supreme Court· 1891-12-29· cited 33×
- Holler v. StateIndiana Supreme Court· 1871-11-15· cited 30×
- State v. TarterOregon Supreme Court· 1894-06-28· cited 20×
- People v. TravisCalifornia Supreme Court· 1880-07-01· cited 14×
- Johnson v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1877-04-15· cited 13×
- Hart v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky· 1887-01-22· cited 10×
- People v. PalmerMichigan Supreme Court· 1893-07-26· cited 9×
- Johnson v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1888-10-15· cited 8×
- Miller v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky· 1888-12-20· cited 7×
- People v. AlivtreCalifornia Supreme Court· 1880-07-01· cited 5×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.