Case Title: State v. Camp

Citation: 146 S.E.2d 643, 266 N.C. 626

Docket Number: 

State: north-carolina

Court: North Carolina Supreme Court

Date: 1966-03-02T00:00:00Z

Document:
146 S.E.2d 643 (1966) 266 N.C. 626 STATE v. Ralph CAMP. No. 7. Supreme Court of North Carolina. March 2, 1966. Atty. Gen. T. W. Bruton and Deputy Atty. Gen. Harry W. McGalliard, for the State. Hamrick & Hamrick, Rutherfordton, for defendant appellant. PER CURIAM. The trial judge included in his charge to the jury a full and fair review of the evidence and of the contentions of both parties concerning the matter of self-defense. He then instructed the jury as follows: The defendant now argues that the language following the last semi-colon constituted an instruction that in order to acquit the defendant on the ground of self-defense the jury would have to find both that the killing was necessary and that the defendant reasonably believed it to be so. We do not so construe the instruction, considered in its entirety as it must be. A homicide may be excusable on the ground of self-defense even though the killing was not actually necessary. An apparent necessity therefor, reasonable in the light of the circumstances as they then appeared to the defendant, is sufficient so far as this element of the defense is concerned. State v. Lee, 258 N.C. 44, 127 S.E.2d 774; State v. Fowler, 250 N.C. 595, 108 S.E.2d 892; State v. Goode, 249 N.C. 632, 107 S.E.2d 70. The foregoing instruction is in accord with this principle. *646 As to the admission of testimony by police officers concerning statements made to them by the defendant, it is sufficient to note that no objection to the introduction of this evidence was made at the trial; there is nothing in the record to suggest that the statements were not voluntary and the record shows affirmatively that the defendant sent for the officers after the killing and told them about it on the way to the scene of it. The remaining assignments of error, relating to the admission of evidence and the failure to enter a judgment of nonsuit, are also without foundation. No error. MOORE, J., not sitting.