Case Name: Frank Marcoguiseppe v State of Ohio
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1926
Citations: 4 Ohio Law Abs. 194
Docket Number: No. 19305
Parties: Frank Marcoguiseppe v State of Ohio.
Judges: Jones, Matthias, Day, Allen, Kinkade and Robinson, JJ., concur.
Reporter: The Ohio Law Abstract
Volume: 4
Pages: 194–195

Head Matter:
No. 19305
Frank Marcoguiseppe v State of Ohio.

Opinion:
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.