State v. Washington

Citations

• 104 La. 443

Syllabus

<p>Syllabus.</p> <p>1. Whether a parent who inflicts corporal punishment on a child is acting in good faith, without passion, prompted by true parental love, is a matter which may be determined largely from the character of the injuries received by the child; and any instructions which would lead to the conclusion that it is incompetent for a jury to differ with the parent as to whether the latter has gone too far is misleading.</p> <p>2. The crime denounced by Act No. 17 of 1888 is the wilful and malicious infliction with a dangerous weapon, or with intent to kill, of a wound less than mayhem, and, although an indictment charging the infliction of such a wound with a dangerous weapon may specify the character of the weapon used, as for instance “a piece of iron,” it is not of the essence of the crime that it should have been committed with a weapon of that kind; hence, if it be proved without objection, that such a wound was wilfully and maliciously inflicted with a dangerous weapon of another kind, the defendant cannot thereafter insist upon the State proving that it was committed with the particular weapon specified in the indictment.</p> <p>3. The action of the trial court in refusing a new trial where no special error of law is pointed out, and where no bill of exceptions, with testimony attached, is taken to the overruling of the motion for new trial, will not be reviewed in this court.</p> <p>4. A complaint involving a matter of fact not patent on the face of the record, but which is made to appear only by the aid of testimony, cannot be the subject of a motion in arrest of judgment.</p>