Aftеr consideration of defendant’s assignments of error challenging, among other things, the sufficiency of the trial court’s findings of fаct on a motion to suppress, the admission of certain evidence and the sufficiency of the evidence tо support second degree murder, we find that defendant received a fair trial free from prejudicial error.
*170 The state’s evidence tended to show that in the early morning hours of 8 May 1977 members of the Jacksonville Rescue Squad resрonding to a call at defendant’s home found defendant’s two-year-old son Patrick dead. An autopsy showed the cause of Patrick Stinson’s death to be laceration of the duodenum, jejunum and ileum with hemorrhage and peritonitis. The doctor who conducted the autopsy testified that in his opinion the cause of the fatal injury could have been human blows. He further stated that there were multiple burns and bruises of varying ages on the deceased’s body. Testimony of other witnesses corroborated the presence of the burns and bruises and the fact that they were of some duration. Defendаnt originally told deputy sheriffs investigating the case that Patrick had drowned. He later stated that he had beaten the child but had not intended to kill him.
Defendant offered no evidence.
Defendant’s first assignment of error challenges the sufficiency of the trial court’s findings of fact on defendаnt’s motion to suppress his statements to the deputy sheriffs. On voir dire defendant testified that Deputy Sheriff Woodward told him it would be to his benefit to talk. Woodward denied making any such statement. Defendant argues that if his confession was induced by hope of benefit it was involuntary and should have been suppressed.
See State v. Fuqua,
Defendant next argues that it was error to allow two lay witnesses to testify that they had observed burns on the body of Patrick Stinson. He contends that these statements were impermissible expressions of opinion. Wе disagree. “This Court has long held that a witness may state the ‘instantaneous conclusions
*171
of the mind as to the appearance, condition, or mental or physical state of persons, animals, and things, derived from observation of a vаriety of facts presented to the senses at one and the same time.’ Such statements are usually referred to as shorthand statements of facts.”
State v. Spaulding,
Defendant’s third assignment of error challenges the admissibility of Dr. Walter Gable’s opinion that the cause of deceаsed’s death could have been human blows. Dr. Gable, who was qualified as an expert forensic pathologist, had cоnducted an autopsy on the body of Patrick Stinson. His opinion was clearly based on that autopsy. “It is a well-settled rule that an expert may give an opinion based on facts within his personal knowledge . . . .”
State v. Wade,
Defendant next assigns as error the introduction into evidence of four color photographs of deceased’s body. “Properly authenticated photographs of the body of a homicide victim may be introduced intо evidence under instructions limiting their use to the purpose of illustrating the witness’ testimony. Photographs are usually compеtent to be used by a witness to explain or illustrate anything that it is competent for him to describe in words.”
State v. Cutshall,
Defendant by his fifth assignment of error contends that the evidence was not sufficient to show the element of malice necessary for a conviction of second degree murder. Defendant bases this argument primarily on his statements to police officers that he did not mean to kill or hurt Patrick Stinson. “While an in
*172
tent to kill is not a necessary element of second degree murder, the crime does not exist in the absence of some intentional act sufficient to show malice and which proximately causes death.”
State v. Wilkerson,
We have examined defendant’s remaining assignments of error and find they do not merit discussion. In the trial there was
No error.