Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
  • W.I. Stone, Coffeeville, for appellant. J.R. Griffin, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.
Judges
  • ARRINGTON, J.
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Click here to upload
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
  • W.I. Stone, Coffeeville, for appellant. J.R. Griffin, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.
Judges
  • ARRINGTON, J.
See more information ...
Smart Summary

West v. State, No. 40887 (Supreme Court of Mississippi, June 9, 1958)

Factual and Procedural Background

The appellant, Thurman (Hootie) West, was jointly indicted with Tom Elton Jones and Orris Bell for the murder of Henry Lee (Bill) Robinson. A severance was granted; West was tried separately, convicted of manslaughter, and sentenced to ten years in the State Penitentiary. He appeals that conviction.

The State's evidence showed that Jones, Bell, and West were at Robinson's home when trouble developed. Bell allegedly asked West, who had an automobile, to take him home to get his gun and stated he would return and kill Robinson. They picked up Jones, who also retrieved a gun. West drove Bell and Jones several miles to their homes; they obtained rifles and were returned by West to a point approximately 400 yards from Robinson's home, after which they proceeded and killed Robinson. Jones testified he killed Robinson and was convicted of murder and sentenced to life; Bell pleaded guilty to murder. The sheriff and a deputy testified that West made a free and voluntary confession admitting he transported Bell and Jones to obtain guns and returned them near Robinson's home. West did not testify at trial. One defense witness, William Slaughter, testified that Bell and Jones got rifles and ordered West to carry them back so they could kill Robinson.

The appellant was indicted and tried under Section 1995, Mississippi Code of 1942 (stating an accessory before the fact shall be deemed and considered a principal).

Legal Issues Presented

  1. Whether the acts and conduct of appellant were sufficient to make him guilty of murder or any crime (i.e., whether his conduct made him an accessory/principal under Sec. 1995).
  2. Whether the State's instruction that, if the jury found an accomplice committed the murder and that appellant transported and knowingly assisted those accomplices, appellant was guilty, was proper.
  3. Whether the State's manslaughter instruction constituted reversible error when evidence might have justified a murder conviction.
  4. Whether the court erred in refusing appellant's requested instruction that would have required the State to prove the killing with malice aforethought and with a deadly weapon beyond a reasonable doubt.

Arguments of the Parties

Appellant's Arguments

  • The appellant contended his acts and conduct were not sufficient to make him guilty of murder or any crime.
  • The appellant assigned error to the State's instruction that, in effect, treated him as guilty if he transported Bell and Jones knowing they intended to murder Robinson and aiding and assisting them.
  • The appellant asserted the court erred by granting the State's manslaughter instruction.
  • The appellant contended the court erred in refusing his requested instruction that required the State to prove the killing with malice aforethought and with a deadly weapon beyond a reasonable doubt.

State's Arguments

  • The State presented an instruction that, if the jury found one of the others murdered Robinson and that the appellant voluntarily transported Bell and Jones to obtain rifles knowing they intended to murder Robinson and aided, assisted, and encouraged them, then appellant was guilty as charged under Sec. 1995 (accessory before the fact deemed a principal).
  • The State relied on its evidence (confession, accomplices' testimony, and witness accounts) to show appellant aided, assisted and encouraged the murder and therefore was properly treated as a principal.

Table of Precedents Cited

Precedent Rule or Principle Cited For Application by the Court
Dean v. State, 85 Miss. 40 Cited in support of the proposition that the State's evidence can show an accused aided, assisted, and encouraged a murder. Used among authorities to support the court's conclusion that the evidence showed appellant aided, assisted and encouraged the murder.
Wynn v. State, 63 Miss. 260 Cited in support of the proposition that the State's evidence can show an accused aided, assisted, and encouraged a murder. Used among authorities to support the court's conclusion that the evidence showed appellant aided, assisted and encouraged the murder.
Walters v. State, 218 Miss. 166, 65 So.2d 465 Cited in support of the proposition that the State's evidence can show an accused aided, assisted, and encouraged a murder. Used among authorities to support the court's conclusion that the evidence showed appellant aided, assisted and encouraged the murder.
Noble v. State, 221 Miss. 339, 72 So.2d 687 Cited in support of the proposition that the State's evidence can show an accused aided, assisted, and encouraged a murder. Used among authorities to support the court's conclusion that the evidence showed appellant aided, assisted and encouraged the murder.
Goss v. State, 205 Miss. 177, 38 So.2d 700 Cited in support of the proposition that the State's evidence can show an accused aided, assisted, and encouraged a murder. Used among authorities to support the court's conclusion that the evidence showed appellant aided, assisted and encouraged the murder.
Gibbs v. State, 223 Miss. 1, 77 So.2d 705 Cited for the proposition that "Aiding and abetting involves some participation in the criminal act" and that such participation may be evidenced by some "word, act, or deed." Quoted and applied to hold that participation by word, act, or deed supports a finding of aiding and abetting by appellant.
Calicoat v. State, 131 Miss. 169, 95 So. 318 Referred to as an earlier decision that, prior to later rulings, would have supported the contention that granting a manslaughter instruction not authorized by evidence was error. The court noted Calicoat but explained that subsequent decisions have deviated, so Calicoat does not require reversal here.
Graham v. State, 195 Miss. 291, 15 So.2d 478 Cited for the rule that where a defendant is convicted of manslaughter upon a State-granted manslaughter instruction, and the evidence might have justified murder, the manslaughter instruction, even if not authorized by the evidence, is not reversible error. Applied to hold that the State's manslaughter instruction was not reversible error in this case.
Bradford v. State, 161 So. 138 Cited as authority listing cases on the identical question about manslaughter instructions and reversibility. Used to support the proposition that a State manslaughter instruction need not produce reversal even if evidence would have supported murder.
Wages v. State, 210 Miss. 187, 49 So.2d 246 Cited in support of the proposition that the appellant's requested instruction was contrary to the statute regarding accessories and thus properly refused. Applied to affirm refusal of appellant's requested instruction because it was not supported by the evidence and was contrary to Sec. 1995.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The court began by observing the indictment under Section 1995, Mississippi Code of 1942, which deems an accessory before the fact a principal. It reviewed the State's evidence: (1) testimony that Bell asked West to drive him home to obtain a gun and that Bell intended to return and kill Robinson; (2) that Jones also obtained a gun; (3) that West drove them to their homes and later returned them to a point about 400 yards from Robinson's home, after which Robinson was killed; (4) Jones's testimony that he killed Robinson and his conviction; (5) Bell's guilty plea; and (6) West's confession, which the sheriff and a deputy testified was free and voluntary and in which West admitted transporting Bell and Jones to obtain guns and returning them near Robinson's home. The court also noted defense testimony (William Slaughter) that Bell and Jones ordered West to carry them back so they could kill Robinson.

Applying the statute and authority cited, the court concluded the evidence established that West aided, assisted, and encouraged the murder. The court relied on authorities (Dean, Wynn, Walters, Noble, Goss) to support that conclusion and quoted Gibbs for the legal proposition that aiding and abetting involves some participation in the criminal act, which may be evidenced by word, act, or deed. On the issue of the State's manslaughter instruction, the court acknowledged that while an earlier case (Calicoat) might have supported reversal, subsequent cases (including Graham and Bradford) have held that a manslaughter instruction granted to the State, even if the evidence would justify murder, is not reversible error. Finally, the court held that the appellant's requested instruction requiring proof of malice and use of a deadly weapon was properly refused because it was unsupported by the evidence and contrary to the accessory statute (citing Wages).

Holding and Implications

Affirmed.

Holding: The Supreme Court of Mississippi affirmed the conviction and ten-year sentence for manslaughter.

Implications: The direct effect is that appellant West's conviction and sentence are upheld. The opinion applies existing statutory law (Sec. 1995) and cited precedent to resolve issues about aiding and abetting and the propriety of instructions; it does not purport to establish a new legal rule beyond applying those authorities.

Show full summary ...

WEST v. STATE

1. Homicide — murder — accessories — aiding and abetting — instructions.

In prosecution under indictment charging defendant, jointly with others, with murder, State's instruction which, in part, instructed jury that if they believed from all the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that one of the others murdered victim and if they further believed that defendant voluntarily, without force or coercion, transported others in automobile in order to secure rifles knowing full well that others intended and designed to murder victim and aided and assisted and encouraged therein, that defendant was guilty, was proper. Sec. 1995, Code 1942.

2. Homicide — evidence established that defendant aided, assisted and encouraged the murder. 3. Criminal law — aiding and abetting — involves some participation in criminal act.

Aiding and abetting involves some participation in criminal act and this may be evidenced by some word, act, or deed. Sec. 1995, Code 1942.

4. Instructions — manslaughter — murder — evidence — State's manslaughter instruction did not constitute reversible error.

Where defendant was convicted of manslaughter upon State's instruction on manslaughter and evidence would have justified conviction of murder, the instruction on manslaughter, even if not authorized by evidence, did not constitute reversible error.

5. Instructions — murder — defendant's requested instruction not supported by evidence and contrary to statute on accessories.

In such case, defendant's requested instruction to effect that defendant was charged by indictment with killing victim with malice aforethought and with killing him with certain gun, a deadly weapon and, unless State proved charge beyond a reasonable doubt, jury should find defendant not guilty was properly refused because it was not supported by evidence and was contrary to statute on accessories. Sec. 1995, Code 1942.

Headnotes as approved by Arrington, J.

ARRINGTON, J.

The appellant, Thurman (Hootie) West, was jointly indicted with Tom Elton Jones and Orris Bell for the murder of Henry Lee (Bill) Robinson. Severance was granted and the appellant was tried and convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to ten years in the State Penitentiary, from which judgment he appeals.

The evidence on the part of the State discloses that Jones, Bell and the appellant were at the home of Robinson when trouble developed between Jones, Bell and the deceased; that Bell requested the appellant, who had an automobile, to take him home to get his gun and that he was coming back and kill Robinson; that they picked up Jones and he also went to get his gun; that the appellant said "if he was use he wouldn't take that." The evidence shows that the appellant drove them to the home of Bell, which was about four miles distant; that Jones got out of the car and went to his home some distance away and got his gun, which, according to the evidence, took him about fifteen or twenty minutes; that they got in the car and the appellant drove them to approximately 400 yards of Robinson's home where they got out and proceeded to the home of Robinson and killed him.

Jones testified on the part of the State that he killed Robinson and was tried and convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. Bell testified that he pleaded guilty to murder.

Mr. Alexander, the Sheriff of Chickasaw County, testified that the appellant made a confession which was free and voluntary and in the confession he said that Bell asked him to take him home to get his gun, that he was coming back and kill Robinson; that they picked up Jones and that both of them, upon reaching their homes, obtained guns for the purpose, and the appellant then returned them to a place approximately 400 yards from the home of Robinson. Mr. Lowery, a deputy sheriff, who was present when the confession was made, testified to the same effect.

The appellant did not testify in his own behalf, neither did he testify upon the preliminary inquiry in the absence of the jury as to the admissibility of the confession. One William Slaughter, who was present in the home of the deceased on the night when the trouble started, testified on behalf of the appellant that he was in the car with Bell and Jones and the appellant when they drove to the home of Bell and that Bell and Jones got their rifles and ordered the appellant to carry them back so that they could kill Robinson.

(Hn 1) The appellant first argues that the acts and conduct of the appellant West were not sufficient to make him guilty of murder or any crime. He also assigns as error the instruction obtained by the State, which, in part, tells the jury that if they believe from all the evidence in this case beyond a reasonable doubt that Jones murdered Robinson, the deceased, and if they further believe that the appellant voluntarily, without being forced or coerced transported Bell and Jones in his automobile several miles to the homes of Bell and Jones where they secured rifles, and knowing full well at the time that Bell and Jones intended and designed to murder Robinson, and aiding and assisting and encouraging therein, that the appellant was guilty as charged. We find no reversible error in the granting of this instruction under the facts in this case.

The appellant was indicted and tried under Section 1995, Mississippi Code of 1942, which reads as follows:

"Every person who shall be an accessory to any felon, before the fact, shall be deemed and considered a principal, and shall be indicted and punished as such; and this whether the principal have been previously convicted or not."

(Hn 2) The evidence on the part of the State shows that the appellant aided, assisted and encouraged the murder. Dean v. State, 85 Miss. 40; Wynn v. State, 63 Miss. 260; Walters v. State, 218 Miss. 166, 65 So.2d 465; Noble v. State, 221 Miss. 339, 72 So.2d 687; Goss v. State, 205 Miss. 177, 38 So.2d 700. (Hn 3) "Aiding and abetting involves some participation in the criminal act" and this may "be evidenced by some `word, act, or deed.'" 22 C.J.S., Criminal Law, Section 88, pp. 158-159. Gibbs v. State, 223 Miss. 1, 77 So.2d 705. (Hn 4) The appellant argues that the court erred in granting to the State the manslaughter instruction. Prior to the decision of Calicoat v. State, 131 Miss. 169, 95 So. 318, counsel would be correct in his contention, however, since that time it has been held in a large number of cases that where a defendant was convicted of manslaughter upon an instruction granted by the state to that effect and the evidence would have justified a conviction of murder, the instruction on manslaughter, even if not authorized by the evidence, was not reversible error. Graham v. State, 195 Miss. 291, 15 So.2d 478. In the case of Bradford v. State, 161 So. 138, the Court cited a long list of cases upon the identical question here presented.

(Hn 5) The appellant also assigns as error that the court erred in refusing the appellant the following instruction: "The court instructs the jury that Thurman (Hootie) West is charged by the indictment with the killing of the deceased of his malice aforethought, and did kill him with a certain gun, a deadly weapon. Unless the state has proved the said charge beyond all reasonable doubt, the jury will find the defendant not guilty."

This instruction was properly refused for the reason that it is not supported by the evidence and for the further reason the instruction is contrary to the provisions of the statute, supra. Wages v. State, 210 Miss. 187, 49 So.2d 246. We are of the opinion that the appellant received a fair and impartial trial and the judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Roberds, P.J., and Kyle, Ethridge and Gillespie, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.
Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

Comments

WEST v. STATE
(Jun 9, 1958)