19 So. 2d 738 | Miss. | 1944
Appellant was convicted of an assault with intent to murder. We need not recount the testimony since it completely justifies the verdict. *534
The following instruction was given for the state: "The court instructs the jury for the State that malice is implied by law from the nature and character of the weapon used and that the use of the deadly weapon in a difficulty and not necessarily in self defense is in law evidence of malice."
The errors in this instruction are seen at a glance. When the entire case is before the jury there is no need nor right to charge them upon a presumption. Walker v. State,
In a case where guilt is less patent such error would require reversal. However, the evidence is overwhelming that the assault was unprovoked and wholly unjustified and no impartial jury with capacity to think and courage to act could reasonably find otherwise. The record itself discloses that the assault was made with a deadly weapon with a deliberate and expressed intent to kill and murder. Sullivan v. State,
Error is predicated of the failure of the instructions for the state to define the term "murder" used therein. The need for explanation of technical legal terms is discussed in Martin v. State,
Other alleged errors have been examined and found either to be without merit or not properly reserved.
Affirmed.