Court Opinion

ID: 9675127
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 04:42:42.337567+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:31.664093
License: Public Domain

On State’s Motion For Rehearing
DAVIDSON, Judge.
By motion for rehearing, supplemented by able oral presentation, state’s counsel presses upon us his contention that the facts warranted the trial court’s conclusion that a conspiracy was shown to exist between appellant and Beverly Jo Thrash, so as to authorize the receipt in evidence of the latter’s hearsay statement.
*108The question presented is exceedingly troublesome and has received much study by the entire court.
The conclusion reached by me is that though I was to agree that the statement was admissible, as contended by the state, such conclusion would by no means require or authorize me to conclude that this conviction should be affirmed.
I am thoroughly convinced that the appellant was entitled to have the jury affirmatively instructed, as he requested, to the effect that if Winona Fine Lee killed the deceased he (appellant) would not be guilty.
As I pointed out in my concurring opinion, the facts raised that defense, and appellant was entitled to have the jury pass directly thereon without the necessity of a finding by such jury that he did not act with Winona Fine Lee in killing the deceased.
From time immemorial it has been the unbroken rule that an accused is entitled to have his affirmative defenses submitted to the jury. I could never agree to affirm this case in the face of the error in failing to do so upon the part of the trial court.
Presiding Judge Morrison remains convinced that the conviction should be reversed for the reasons stated in the original opinion.
I am convinced that the judgment should be reversed because of the error in the charge, as above pointed out.
Judge Woodley remains convinced that the judgment should be affirmed, for the reasons pointed out in his dissenting opinion.
The state’s motion for rehearing is overruled.