Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

52 Ark. 45

Luckinbill v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided May 15, 1889

Supreme Court of Arkansas · decided 1889-05-15

M. T. Sanders, Judge. 1. The State should have been required to introduce the-eye-witness to the killing, and if the State refuses the court, should call them on its own motion.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1889-05-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently September 1964

1 district · 7 state decisions

30188918901900191019201930194019501960decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Cockrill, C. J.,

¶1dissenting. The charge of the court fairly defines the law of self-defense. The shortcoming of the instruction upon which the case is reversed, was, I think, fully supplied by the learned judge in other portions of the charge upon the same subject, and it does not seem to me probable that the jury was misled by the court.

¶2The oft-repeated rule of this court, that the whole charge must be looked to for the purpose of testing the accuracy of any part of it, together with the allegiance we owe to a jury’s-verdict, where it is obviously justified by the evidence, seems-to me to demand that the judgment be affirmed,

Judge Battle concurs with me in this view.
/52/ark/45 · .json · Public domain