Jump to content

Thomas v. Kinkead

From Wikisource
Thomas v. Kinkead
by the Arkansas Supreme Court
Syllabus

Cite as: Thomas v. Kinkead, 55 Ark. 502, 18 S.W. 854 (1892).

4682909Thomas v. Kinkead — Syllabus1892by the Arkansas Supreme Court

Arkansas Supreme Court

55 Ark. 502

THOMAS  v.  KINKEAD

Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court, Joseph W. Martin, Judge
Decided February 27, 1892

Court Documents
Opinion of the Court

Syllabus

[edit]

Homicide—To prevent escape of misdemeanant.

A peace officer, having arrested one accused of misdemeanor, cannot kill him to prevent his escape although no other means of prevention are available.

Argument by appellants

[edit]

T. J. Oliphint for appellants.

1. An officer cannot take life in attempting to arrest or to prevent escape after arrest, in misdemeanor cases, unless the party resists by force, endangering the life of the officer or threatening great bodily harm. The court’s instructions on that subject were erroneous, 11 Ky. L., 67; 2 Lea, 720; 1 Lewin, Cr. Cases, 187; 3 S.W. Rep., 622; 44 Texas, 645; 50 Ala., 117; 1 Hale, P. C., 481; 1 East, P. C., 302; 65 N.C., 327; 44 Tex., 128 ; 106 N.C., 728; 11 S.W. Rep., 520.

2. As to the law of arrest, see Mansf. Dig., sec. 2005; 50 Mich., 549; 1 Bald., 240; 21 Ala., 240; 8 Me., 127; 22 Mich., 267; 1 Wend., 210.

Argument by appellees

[edit]

Ratcliffe & Fletcher for appellees.

1. Thomas being under arrest, whether for misdemeanor or felony, when he attempted to break away, Heard had a right to shoot him to prevent escape if that extreme measure was necessary. 1 Bish., Cr. Pr. (2d ed.), sec. 161; 106 N.C., 728; 3 S.W. Rep., 623; 44 Tex., 128; 34 Minn., 361; 30 Ala., 682, 693–4; 3 Harr., 568–9; 1 Mill, S.C., 385–7 ; 1 Hill, S.C., 212; 1 East, P.C., 295; 1 Russell on Cr., 665; 2 Bish., Cr. Law, secs. 662–3; 80 Ky., 1; 78 id., 380.

2. The sureties are not liable for the acts of Heard. 49 Pa. St, 151; 2 Des. (S. C.), 629; 13 Mo., 437; 28 N.J.L., 224; 11 Ired. (N.C.), 141; 51 N.H., 136 ; 44 Mo., 491; 37 Conn., 365; 32 Ind., 239; 22 La. An., 600: 39 Fed. Rep., 853; 43 N.W. Rep., 297; 8 Otto, 142; Addison on Cont., [p503] pp. 65–6 appendix; 9 Mo. App., 63; 84 N.C., 128; 58 Miss., 717; 55 Cal., 304.


This work is in the public domain in the U.S. because it is an edict of a government, local or foreign. See § 313.6(C)(2) of the Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices. Such documents include "legislative enactments, judicial decisions, administrative rulings, public ordinances, or similar types of official legal materials" as well as "any translation prepared by a government employee acting within the course of his or her official duties."

These do not include works of the Organization of American States, United Nations, or any of the UN specialized agencies. See Compendium III § 313.6(C)(2) and 17 U.S.C. 104(b)(5).

A non-American governmental edict may still be copyrighted outside the U.S. Similar to {{PD-in-USGov}}, the above U.S. Copyright Office Practice does not prevent U.S. states or localities from holding copyright abroad, depending on foreign copyright laws and regulations.

Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse