People v. Murphy
Before: Chipman
Synopsis
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
CHIPMAN, P. J.
Defendant was accused of the crime of murder, the alleged victim being one Amos Hardy. The jury brought in a verdict of guilty of manslaughter and the court sentenced him to imprisonment at Folsom for the period of six years. Defendant appeals from the judgment and from the order denying his motion for a new trial.
The only point urged on appeal is that the evidence was insufficient to justify the verdict.
There was evidence tending to show the following facts: One McAndrews was at the time of the homicide the proprietor of a saloon in the city of Stockton; defendant and two other men—a man by the name of Curley and another by the name of Kane—came into McAndrews’s saloon about 9 o’clock at night, both defendant and Curley somewhat intoxicated; at this time McAndrews, deceased, Hardy, and two other men were engaged in a game of cards in the room not far from the bar; defendant and his party had a drink at the bar after which defendant went to the table where the card game was going on and offered to shake hands with McAndrews between whom and himself there had been some previous disagreement; McAndrews repulsed defendant’s offer and directed his bartender, Mello, not to serve any more drinks to defendant. Then ensued a general brawl or personal encounter between defendant and his party and McAndrews and his bartender, the details of which need not be stated here. It resulted in defendant’s being ejected from the room; he immediately ran in again and commenced throwing dishes promiscuously that were on the counter and was again put out. Deceased, Hardy, had been a mere spectator of these disturbances and took no part in them; so far as appears he was a stranger to defendant and no motive
[138]
appeared for defendant’s subsequent assault upon deceased who left the saloon shortly after defendant was thrown out the second time. He had gone but a short distance when he was assaulted by two men who, the evidence tended to show, were Curley and defendant. In his struggle with these two men he was beaten about the face and received a wound in the back by some sharp instrument which penetrated his lungs; he returned to the saloon, the evidence of his injuries in his face apparent, and it was soon discovered that he had received a knife wound; the police were called and he was taken to the hospital where he died in about two weeks of pneumonia superinduced by this wound; defendant, after this affray outside, again came to the saloon door, but was confronted by a gun in Mello’s hands and left; he and Curley then went to a poolroom across the street and was, a few minutes later, there arrested with Curley by a police officer and taken to the police station. This officer testified that Curley was three or four feet in front of Mm as they started for the station and defendant close by the officer’s side; the latter heard something drop on the pavement, as they stepped to the gutter, and picked it up, which proved to be a pocket knife. He said to defendant, ‘ ‘ Here is your knife, Murphy, ’ ’. but Murphy said it was not his; he then called to Curley, saying, “Here is your knife, Curley,” but he denied its ownership. The officer put the knife in his pocket. At this time the officer had not learned that any one had been cut, but on arriving at the station he learned of the affray. He then took the knife from Ms pocket and, opening the large blade, found what he testified was fresh blood upon it. Curley testified that he did not drop the knife and the evidence showed that there was no reasonable hypothesis other than that defendant dropped it.
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)