Case ID: ohio-law-abs_4/html/0194-04.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "MARSHALL, C.J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

No. 248
    No. 19305
    Frank Marcoguiseppe v State of Ohio.
    Error to the Court of Appeals of Cuyahoga county.
    225. CHARGE TO JURY — Where self defense is pleaded it is error for the trial judge to charge that the evidence (480) adduced must be, that the defendant was actually in danger of his life and not that he thought that he so was.
    841. NEW TRIAL — Where both defendants are jointly indicted (629) and both guilty; and part of evidence not s-íplicaVíe to both, it is not error as matter of law to grant motion for a new trial as to one, and not to the other.
   MARSHALL, C.J.

1. On trial of an indictment for assault with intent to kill or assault with intent 'to wound, where the accused pleads justification on the ground of self-defense and evidence is adduced by the accused tending to support that defense, it is error for the trial court to instruct the jury that the danger which the accused is urging in support of his plea of self-defense must be actual and that it is not enough that the accused honestly believed that he was in imminent danger.

2. In the trial of two defendants jointly in-dieted, where all the evidence is not equally applicable to both defendants and where there is a joint verdict of guilty as to both defendants, it is not error as a matter of law to sustain a motion for a new trial as to one and overrule it as to the other.

Judgment reversed.

Jones, Matthias, Day, Allen, Kinkade and Robinson, JJ., concur.