|
Hotema v. United States, 186 U.S. 413 (1902)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Hotema v. United States, 186 U.S. 413 (1902)
Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 186 U.S. 401, click here.
Hotema v. United States No. 672 Submitted April 28, 1902 Decided June 2, 1902 186 U.S. 413
ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
Syllabus
In relation to the part of this charge in which the court speaks of an irresistible impulse to commit the murder, counsel for the defendant says that he made no claim that the defendant was actuated by an irresistible impulse, and that there is nothing in the evidence to show that he was; that what he did claim was that the defendant was laboring under an insane delusion, and that this charge did not bring that subject before the jury. As there is no portion of the evidence returned in the bill of exceptions, this Court is unable to judge whether there was any which would justify, or which did justify the court in submitting the question of irresistible impulse to the jury. If there had been evidence on that subject, the submission of the question was certainly as fair to the defendant as he could ask. The court decides nothing further than that.
Upon the other portion of the charge, as to the general liability of the defendant to the criminal law and to the obligation of the government to prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt upon taking into consideration all the evidence, and in regard to every essential element of the crime, the charge of the court was undoubtedly correct.
Taking the whole charge together, the court properly laid down the law in regard to the responsibility of the defendant on account of his alleged mental condition.
The question whether, upon a consideration of the facts, the extreme penalty of the law should be carried out upon this defendant is not one over which this Court has jurisdiction.
The case is stated in the opinion of the court.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Hotema v. United States, 186 U.S. 413 (1902) in 186 U.S. 413 186 U.S. 414. Original Sources, accessed November 22, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=JPVK84WTN3TBP6V.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Hotema v. United States, 186 U.S. 413 (1902), in 186 U.S. 413, page 186 U.S. 414. Original Sources. 22 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=JPVK84WTN3TBP6V.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Hotema v. United States, 186 U.S. 413 (1902). cited in 1902, 186 U.S. 413, pp.186 U.S. 414. Original Sources, retrieved 22 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=JPVK84WTN3TBP6V.
|