Stephens v. State
Citations
- 65 Miss. 329
Syllabus
<p>1. Criminal Law. Cruelly to animals. Section 2918, Code of 1880, construed. Case in judgment.</p> <p>S. was indicted for killing a hog, under Section 2918, Code of 1880, which makes it a misdemeanor for any person to “ cruelly beat, abuse, starve, torture or purposely injure any horse, ox or other animal belonging to himself or another.” On the trial there was evidence which tended to show that S. shot and killed certain hogs while depredating on his crop. The defendant asked the court to instruct the jury that they should find him not guilty, if they believed that he killed the hogs while depredating on his crop and to protect it, and not out of a spirit of cruelty to the animals. The court refused such instruction. Held, that this was error. If the defendant was not actuated by a spirit of cruelty, or a disposition to inflict unnecessary pain and suffering, he was not guilty under the statute.</p> <p>2. Same. Cruelty to animals. Intent and purpose.</p> <p>It is immaterial in such case, whether the accused had a lawful fence, or whether the hogs killed were his property or that of another, or whether ■ he is liable in a civil suit for a trespass. His guilt or innocence is determinable by the intent and purpose which prompted his act.</p>
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- animal protection statutes were not intended to interfere, and do not interfere, with the necessary discipline of animals
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Arnold
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
8 cases in this archive cite this case.
- United States v. StevensThird Circuit· 2008-07-18· cited 28×
- and 14CA1436. People v. HarrisColorado Court of Appeals· 2016-11-03· cited 19×
- Campbell v. Superior CourtCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 1996-09-10· cited 14×
- Regalado v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1990-03-16· cited 13×
- State v. PraterMissouri Court of Appeals· 1908-04-14· cited 8×
- Davis v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 2001-12-13· cited 4×
- Hunt v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals· 1892-01-20· cited 4×
- Edson Davis v. State of MississippiMississippi Supreme Court· 2000-03-10
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.