Title: Cochran v. State
Citation: 278 So. 2d 451
Docket Number: 47235
State: Mississippi
Issuer: Mississippi Supreme Court
Date: May 28, 1973

278 So. 2d 451 (1973) Rayvon COCHRAN v. STATE of Mississippi. No. 47235. Supreme Court of Mississippi. May 28, 1973. Rehearing Denied June 18, 1973. Harry L. Kelley, Jackson, Stanford Young, Waynesboro, for appellant. A.F. Summer, Atty. Gen., by Wayne Snuggs, Special Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee. SUGG, Justice: Appellant, Rayvon Cochran, was convicted in the Circuit Court of Wayne County, Mississippi, for the murder of Irvin Palmer and sentenced to life imprisonment in the Mississippi State Penitentiary. This conviction was reversed in Cochran v. State, 244 So. 2d 22 (Miss. 1971), and upon retrial appellant was convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to serve a term of 16 years in the Mississippi State Penitentiary, less credit for the time spent in jail awaiting trial. From this last conviction, appellant perfects his appeal and assigns as error the following: In support of his first assignment of error, appellant argues that, since Palmer, the deceased, was younger and stronger than he, he was entitled to the following instruction: At the time of the homicide appellant weighed 140 pounds, had lost the use of his right hand, and was 43 years of age; the deceased was 23 years of age, weighed approximately 220 pounds and was in good health, but appellant did not claim that deceased threatened to give him a physical beating with his hands and feet, but was defending himself against an attack by Palmer who was armed with a deadly weapon, a knife, and that he received a cut on his leg as a result of the attack by Palmer. Under this testimony appellant was granted the following instructions: Appellant's instruction number 8 presented to the jury his defense that he was repelling an attack by an armed man and instruction number 10 stated his right of self-defense. Instruction number 2 was properly refused under the facts in this case because appellant's defense was that he was being attacked by an armed aggressor. Under such claim, an instruction based on disparity of size and physical condition has no application. *453 Appellant contends by his second assignment of error that the court erred in refusing his requested peremptory instruction. The rule in regard to a peremptory instruction is the same in criminal and civil cases, the rule being that when all the evidence on behalf of the State is taken as true, together with all sound or reasonable inferences that may be drawn therefrom, if there is enough to support a verdict of conviction, the peremptory instruction must be denied. Stringer v. State, 279 So. 2d 156 (Miss.) (decision rendered May 28, 1973), McLendon v. State, 187 Miss. 247, 191 So. 821 (1939). The peremptory instruction was properly denied under this rule. The third and final assignment of error is that the verdict of the jury was against the overwhelming weight of the evidence. The evidence for the State showed that deceased had threatened appellant earlier in the day during a difficulty; that deceased and appellant had been drinking together earlier in the afternoon and evening; that appellant had gone from place to place looking for deceased and after locating deceased shortly before the homicide, told one of his good friends who was a State's witness that he was "going to cut the son-of-a-bitch's guts out"; that immediately prior to the stabbing that resulted in the death of Palmer there was no argument between them until appellant renewed the previous argument; that Palmer suggested they forget about the previous difficulty and offered to buy appellant a beer. Appellant and his witnesses testified to facts that tended to show that deceased was the aggressor and that appellant was acting in self-defense which, if believed by the jury, would have resulted in his acquittal, but the issues were resolved against him on conflicting evidence. In Wilson v. State, 264 So. 2d 828 (Miss. 1972), this Court stated: See also McLelland v. State, 204 So. 2d 158 (Miss. 1967); Gangloff v. State, 242 Miss. 168, 134 So. 2d 481 (1961); Cobb v. State, 235 Miss. 57, 108 So. 2d 719 (1959); Ivey v. State, 206 Miss. 734, 40 So. 2d 609 (1949); Hill v. State, 199 Miss. 254, 24 So. 2d 737 (1946); Evans v. State, 159 Miss. 561, 132 So. 563 (1931); Steward v. State, 154 Miss. 858, 123 So. 891 (1929). Since there was ample evidence to sustain the verdict, it will not be disturbed on appeal. For the reasons stated, this case is affirmed. Affirmed. GILLESPIE, C.J., and PATTERSON, SMITH and ROBERTSON, JJ., concur.