STATE v. HARDIN

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Docket Number

10437

Attorney(S)

Messrs. Butler Hall, for appellant, cite: While the law will presume malice from the intentional killing with a deadly weapon when nothing else appears, however when all the testimony is out showing the facts and circumstances such presumption disappears: 72 S.C. 200. Charge only gave the jury option of finding defendant guilty of murder or manslaughter: 89 S.C. 140; 85 S.C. 265. Interpretation of "fault" as used in cases of self-defense: 33 S.C. 594; 21 Cyc. 806, 1053. For correct statement of law as to self-defense see: 13 S.C. 464; 33 S.C. 582; 29 S.C. 236; 43 S.C. 212; 52 S.C. 484; 68 S.C. 137; 59 S.C. 305; 85 S.C. 67; 71 S.C. 146; 82 S.C. 399; 85 S.C. 241; 94 S.C. 34; 94 S.C. 461; 103 S.C. 320; 99 S.C. 753. Rule as to retreat to escape necessity of killing: 85 S.C. 241; 40 S.C. 360; 29 S.C. 236; 55 S.C. 36; 90 S.C. 293; 40 S.C. 383; 40 S.E. 332; 41 L.Ed. (U.S.) 551. Mr. N.W. Hardin, also for appellant, cites: Burden as to self-defense was put on defendant: 36 S.C. 486; 60 S.C. 472; 71 S.C. 136; 73 S.C. 257. As to means of escape: 13 S.C. 464; 29 S.C. 34; 40 S.C. 383; 42 S.C. 205; 34 S.C. 16; 15 Sup. Ct. Rep. (U.S.) 692; 79 S.C. 149; 109 S.C. 410. Mr. I.C. Blackwood, Solicitor, for respondent. Oral argument.

See more information ...

Smart Summary

Please sign up to generate summary.

STATE v. HARDIN.

June 28, 1920. The opinion of the Court was delivered by

MR. JUSTICE WATTS.

The appellant was tried on an indictment for murder at the Fall term of Court for Cherokee county, 1919, before Judge Gary, and a jury, and found guilty of manslaughter, and sentenced to six years on public works. From this sentence defendant appeals, and by 10 exceptions imputes error in his Honor's charge to the jury, and his refusal to charge certain requests asked for by the defendant.

The exceptions are all overruled, being without merit. The charge, taken as a whole, was a clear, lucid exposition of the law, applicable to the case, and, had his Honor taken the time to have written out his charge before he charged the jury, he could not have made it clearer, plainer, or more lucid, or freer from error.

Judgment affirmed.

STATE v. HARDIN.

Comments