State v. McCalla
State v. McCalla
Dissenting Opinion
dissenting. The Judge’s charge, in my opinion, was erroneous and prejudicial to the defendant. In accidental killing only is defendant guilty when he is guilty of gross negligence or criminal carelessness, and not ordinary negligence.
Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
This is an appeal from the sentence imposed upon the defendant, who was convicted of manslaughter. The question is whether a person is subject to conviction for involuntary manslaughter, when he' is only guilty of ordinary negligence in handling a pistol which results in the killing of a bystander. The following cases show that the exceptions raising this question cannot be sustained. State v. Gilliam, 66 S. C. 419; 45 S. E. 6; State v. Tucker, 86 S. C. *304 211, 68 S. E. 523; State v. Revels, 86 S. C. 213, 86 S. E. 523.
The appellant’s attorneys upon request were granted permission to review said cases, but this Court is satisfied that they embody sound propositions of law, and see no reasons for overruling the principles upon which they were decided.
Appeal dismissed.
Footnote. — As to homicide caused by negligence or carelessness, see notes in 3 L. R. A. 645, 61 L. R. A. 277 et seq., 63 L. R. A. 292, 30 L. R. A. (N. S.) 458, 33 L. R. A. (N. S.) 403, 45 L. R. A. (N. S.) 559, 13 A. & E. Ann. Cas. 42.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- State v. McCalla.
- Cited By
- 5 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Homicide — Manslaughter—Involuntary Manslaughter. — One guilty only of ordinary negligence in handling a pistol, which results in the death of a bystander, may be convicted of involuntary manslaughter.