Opinion ID: 1688008
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: refusal of trial court to instruct the jury it might find hammock guilty of manslaughter.

Text: The trial court declined to grant an instruction informing the jury that, if it found that the defendant had committed the homicide, it might find him guilty of manslaughter rather than of murder. Manslaughter has been defined as the killing of a human being in the heat of passion by use of a dangerous weapon without authority of law and not in necessary self-defense. Jones v. State, 58 So.2d 655 (Miss. 1952). The distinction between murder and manslaughter is that the homicide in the case of murder must have been committed with malice and after deliberation. Goldsby v. State, 226 Miss. 1, 78 So.2d 762 (1955), certiorari denied, 350 U.S. 925, 76 S.Ct. 216, 100 L.Ed. 809. Ed Rehak, M.D., performed an autopsy on the body of Williams. Death occurred on August 13, 1977, and there were three gunshot wounds on the body although it could not be determined with any certainty which wounds were entry wounds and which were exit. It was the doctor's opinion that Williams had been shot twice, once in the front and once in the back. In his confession, Hammock related how, pursuant to a preconceived purpose, he lured Williams to a lonely spot, induced him to get out of the automobile for the purpose of killing him and how he then shot him as he lay on the ground, returning to make sure that Williams was dead by shooting him again. In addition to Hammock's confession, one Randy Waldrop, a convicted burglar, testified as a witness for the State. He said that two weeks prior to the murder he had delivered to Charles Hammock a sixteen gauge shotgun in exchange for an automobile tape player. Waldrop and Hammock visited each other from time to time and on August 14, 1977, Hammock told Waldrop that he had killed Williams, his stepfather, with the shotgun and asked Waldrop to dispose of the weapon. Waldrop said that, using a hacksaw provided by Hammock's mother, he destroyed the gun and took the pieces to her house where they were hidden in the washing machine. Waldrop testified that he reported these facts to the sheriff at Wiggins. The record in this case contains no evidence capable of supporting a conviction of manslaughter. Hammock's defense is that he did not commit the homicide. His confession shows both deliberation and malice. Hammock was guilty of murder or nothing. The trial court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury that it might find Hammock guilty of manslaughter as there was no evidence capable of supporting such a finding. Presley v. State, 321 So.2d 309 (Miss. 1975). In order to justify the giving of a manslaughter instruction in a homicide case there must be competent evidence tending to show that the killing was in the heat of passion and without deliberation or malice. Newell v. State, 209 Miss. 653, 48 So.2d 332 (1950); Caldwell v. State, 347 So.2d 1389 (Miss. 1977); Ruffin v. State, 227 Miss. 204, 85 So.2d 821 (1956). No prejudicial error having been shown to have occurred in the trial of Hammock, and the evidence fully supporting the verdict of guilty returned by the jury, the  conviction and sentence appealed from must be, and are, affirmed. AFFIRMED. PATTERSON, C.J., ROBERTSON, P.J., and SUGG, WALKER, BROOM, LEE, BOWLING and COFER, JJ., concur.