Harris v. State
55 Ga.App. 189, 189 S.E. 680, 1937 Ga. App. LEXIS 35 (1937)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
When a person voluntarily fires a loaded pistol at another without excuse or justification, and the victim dies, the law conclusively presumes malice, and the grade of homicide will not be reduced to involuntary manslaughter, even if the slayer's intent was merely to wound or cripple.
Facts:
- W. J. Harris, a smaller man somewhat drawn with rheumatism, and the deceased, an able-bodied, strong, and robust man, had an argument about a jug.
- Harris called the deceased a "liar" and a "God damn liar."
- The deceased then struck Harris two hard blows with his fists.
- According to Harris and a witness, after being struck twice, the deceased hit Harris a third time over the head with a stick, knocking him down.
- Harris contended the deceased then picked up a small goat-cart/wagon and was trying to advance on him with it.
- Harris shot the deceased three times, once in the thigh, once in the stomach above the navel, and once in the shoulder, resulting in the deceased's death.
- A witness testified that Harris was shooting at the deceased's legs or feet.
Procedural Posture:
- W. J. Harris was convicted of voluntary manslaughter by a jury in the trial court.
- The trial court fixed Harris's punishment at not less than ten nor more than fifteen years.
- Harris filed a motion for a new trial, which was overruled by the trial court.
- Harris excepted to the overruling of his motion for a new trial, appealing the case to the Court of Appeals of Georgia.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Did the trial court err by failing to charge the jury on involuntary manslaughter when there was testimony that the defendant shot the deceased in the legs, or by giving jury instructions that allegedly excluded physical evidence from consideration?
Opinions:
Majority - MacIntyre, J.
No, the trial court did not err in failing to charge the jury on involuntary manslaughter or in its instructions regarding physical evidence. The jury was authorized to render a verdict of voluntary manslaughter given the altercation where Harris provoked the deceased, was struck, and then shot the deceased three times. The court's instructions, when read as a whole, did not withdraw physical evidence (such as the stick and goat-cart) from the jury's consideration, as other parts of the charge explicitly mentioned considering "the entire case, the evidence, facts and circumstances, including the physical evidence, if any." Furthermore, the argument that shooting at the legs or feet negates an intent to kill, thereby reducing the crime to involuntary manslaughter, is not legally sound. Citing State v. Stovall, the court reiterated that voluntarily firing a loaded pistol at another without excuse or justification, leading to death, presumes malice, and the grade of homicide is not reduced to involuntary manslaughter even if the slayer's intent was merely to wound or cripple. Therefore, the court was correct in charging the law of voluntary manslaughter and defining its statutory terms.
Concurring - Broyles, C.J., and Guerry, J.
Broyles, C.J., and Guerry, J., concurred with the majority opinion.
Analysis:
This case reinforces the principle that intent to wound or cripple with a deadly weapon is generally sufficient to establish malice for voluntary manslaughter or murder, rather than reducing the crime to involuntary manslaughter, especially when the firing is voluntary and unjustified. It clarifies that a trial court's jury instructions must be viewed in their entirety, and minor omissions or conditional phrasing (like 'if any') will not be deemed reversible error if other instructions adequately cover the same ground. The case underscores the serious legal implications of using a firearm during a physical altercation, emphasizing that the law often presumes a dangerous intent when such a weapon is deployed.
