Mathews v. State
136 Ala. 47
Ala.
1902
Check Treatment
DOWDELL, J.

There was no error in overruling the defendant’s objection to the testimony of the witness Frank McGee as to statements made by the defen*50dant shortly after the. homicide. It was made clearly to appear that no threats or promises were made to induce the statement.

Written charge 1 is conceded by appellant’s counsel to he incomplete and defective.

Charge 2 pretermits the element of the honest belief of ¡the defendant in the imminency of the peril, and for this reason if no other was bad.

Charge 3 pretermits one or more of the constituents elements of self-defense and was, therefore, properly refused. Similar charges have, often been condemned by this court. — Gilmore v. State, 126 Ala. 20; Miller v. State, 107 Ala. 45; Wilkins v. State, 98 Ala. 6, and authorities cited in these cases.

There is no error in the record, and the judgment will be'affirmed.