*1 COOK, Appellant, Allen L.
The STATE of
Court Criminal
March Nallas, Gauen, Jr., Payne Roye,
F. T. Graham, appellant. Douglas, Austin, Atty.,
Leon B. State’s for the State.
DICE, Commissioner. punishment, murder; The offense is twenty years.
The state’s evidence shows that at a cedar day *2 708 deep,
cutters’ inches been camp located on Creek in could have Conner knife, part with and Young County. the a that cause of southeast of the death m., deceased, of p. twenty-two Around the was the knife wound loss blood. and years young of and men age, three other proof The further shows that state’s drove the creek in and an automobile went to the Edwards John stopped opposite camp. the on the side from investigate killing, talking scene in the companions began The and his deceased appellant appellant with the gave the sheriff drinking and time beer some of knife, saying that it the knife a he exposed parts private them in such boy.” “used It that further shown they manner seen that could be those fact, that the knife was the knife present camp, a at the mother and including used the stabbing deceased daughter. present one When of those at belonged appellant’s but and that son the camp began shooting the rifle .22 at some a appellant stabbing knife used in the cans, one the the of members of deceased's given by they him to his son after returned party hollered across the creek and referred camp. This son knife the hid and person doing shooting the the as an was later found and introduced evidence. s. o. b. invitation issued was also for person the doing shooting the to come behalf, appellant Testifying his own response across In the creek. the in- companions stated that when he and his vitation, appellant, son, the his and three went they across the creek met the were staying camp others at the crossed the creek boys, deceased the and other three who in a boat went and ashore where the de- clubs; were armed sticks that when with were, companions ceased and his at the boy he told to throw stick one down the a automobile, armed with and sticks clubs. A stomach, knocking kicked in the fight ensued and when the deceased ran him causing him to fall and around the front of the automobile he was ground; appellant got up that when he was ground Dahl, thrown to the Charles a “goofy” his and had knife in hand and appellant’s member party. of the While the down, boy, ran into the “I who fell and ground, were on the came to grabbed picked right leg him the and it they where struggling and then up Appellant and stabbed it.” further away. walked Blood was then seen on the seriously swore that had in- he no intent to got up deceased and Dahl jure anyone, that on back companions other back to across the creek the he the washed boat across creek. After arriving blood off his knife. He further swore that appellant, talking son, he purposely give did sheriff the not “ guess taught stated: T that him a lesson. he wrong knife and that the reason did guess don’t them be coming S.O.B.’s will swapped was because his son knives had ” back down here.’ stabbing. him after in his It submitted to the was further shown the deceased of guilt of ground by was left issue both his three companions, murder with and without and also of who fled malice in the automobile but aggravated simple later assault. returned to scene. re- When turned, the deceased was on the By jury rejected appel- their verdict they proceeded hospital, to take him a explanation lant’s of pronounced upon he where was dead arrival by Dr. R. G. McDaniel. first
We
overrule
con
Dr. McDaniel
tention
testified that the deceased
evidence is insufficient to
puncture
upper
wound in the left
of
because
conviction
thigh, approximately
proof
one
one
there is no
intent to kill. The
half
ter’s
were tendered
stabbed
statements
shows
for
cross-examination
deceased and left him
knees in a
on his
witnesses,
were still available
dying
hollering
condition
“Don’t leave
reflects
get
re-
examination. The record
me. Come back and
me.” After
*3
the witness
began
appellant did examine
turning
filing that
statement
Minter from the witness’s written
an axe while the deceased was
jury.
plain sight.
grand
before the
across the creek in
finding
are sufficientto
Such facts
limit in his
failure
The court’s
by the
of intent to kill. See: Harris
jury
the wit
jury’s consideration of
charge the
v.
Error is also com certain
ments ruling
the admissibility of evidence. No
appears have been Therefore,
such nothing pre comments.
sented for review.
Finding the evidence sufficientto
the conviction ap-
pearing, is affirmed.
Opinion approved by the Court.
WOODLEY, Judge (dissenting). authority cited, inspect
was entitled to used in document jury’s presence the memory to refresh witness, lay predicate or to for im-
peachment, request. the time of his permitted
That see
grand jury testimony of the Witness Dahl
long lengthy after his examination was
completed, and after other witnesses had close,
testified and the state ready any
without or demand for inspection compliance was not a recently February followed as rule Walton v. that reversal will result any showing
without the de- injury for nial of timely defendant’s that he be inspect document, instru-
ment statement used before jury, in questioning such as a witness.
Appellant’s request timely. not.
leave to respectfully dissent.