State v. Phillips
State v. J. H. Phillips.
Opinion of the Court
Ervin, J.
The defendant assigns as error the following instruction of the court to the jury: “When it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant intentionally shot and killed the deceased with a deadly weapon, to wit, a pistol, and I charge you that a pistol in this case is a deadly weapon, then the law casts upon the defendant the burden of proving to your satisfaction, not beyond a reasonable doubt or by the greater weight of the evidence, circumstances which would mitigate murder in the second degree to manslaughter or excuse it altogether on the grounds of accident.”
The presumptions that a homicide was unlawful and done with malice do not arise against the slayer in a prosecution for homicide unless he admits or the State proves that he intentionally killed the deceased with a deadly weapon.
S. v. Ellison, 226 N. C. 628 , 39 S. E. (2) 824;
S. v. Burrage, 223 N. C. 129 , 25 S. E. (2) 393;
S. v. Debnam, 222 N. C. 266 , 22 S. E. (2) 562;
S. v. Gregory, 203 N. C. 528 , 166 S. E. 387 . Since there was no testimony at the trial tending to show that the killing of the deceased by the defendant was intentional, the instruction which the defendant challenges was not pertinent, and tended to confuse the jury. The question of the guilt or innocence of the accused upon the charge of manslaughter ought to have been submitted to the jury with appropriate instructions.
S. v. Limerick, 146 N. C. 649 , 61 S. E. 568 . Hence, the verdict and judgment in the court below are set aside, and the appellant is awarded a New trial.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 4 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.