People v. Lynch

Good Law
101 Cal. 229·1894 Cal. LEXIS 1013·35 P. 860
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 6, 1894No. 21037California670 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Garoutte, J.

The defendant was convicted of an assault with a deadly weapon, and appeals from the judgment and order denying his motion for a new trial. He claims the shooting to have been done in self-defense, and contends that the court committed error in its instructions to the jury upon the law of the case.

1. An exception was taken to the following instruction:

Counsel say: “ Suppose defendant had assaulted the prosecuting witness with a deadly weapon with intent to do him great bodily harm; if it had been done in necessary self-defense he was entirely justified. Yet this instruction clearly directs the jury to find him guilty if such assault alone be proven.” A complete answer to this supposition is, that no such a state of facts could exist. One person cannot assault another in *231 self-defense. An assault in itself is unlawful, and any act done in self-defense cannot be an assault.

2. The court gave the following instruction:

We think the instruction entirely correct. To be sure, it says nothing about threats, but threats alone never justify a homicide. Words, however grievous, do not even reduce a homicide from murder to manslaughter. While threats are always admissible as…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.