#### STATE v. KEITH LAWSON.

(Filed 5 May, 1965.)

Appeal by defendant from Mallard, J., November, 1963 Criminal Session, Columbus Superior Court.

The defendant, Keith Lawson, was charged with the felony of murder in the first degree in the killing of Bobby DeLane Hilbourn. The offense is alleged to have occurred on April 20, 1963. The evidence disclosed the deceased died on October 10, 1963. The Solicitor for the State and both defendant and his counsel stipulated that Bobby De-Lane Hilbourn died as a direct result of the gunshot wound inflicted on April 20, 1963.

At the trial the solicitor announced the State would not ask for a verdict of guilty of murder in the first degree, but only in the second degree. The defendant entered a plea of not guilty. Both the State and the defendant introduced evidence, including a number of eye-witnesses to the shooting. The defendant, however, did not testify in his own defense.

The evidence of the State’s witnesses, if believed, would amply justify a finding the defendant first threatened the deceased with an open knife and then took from the automobile in which the deceased was then sitting a shotgun with which he inflicted the fatal wound at a time when the deceased was unarmed. The evidence favorable to the State made out a case of murder in the second degree.

The defendant’s witnesses, if believed, would permit a finding the deceased attempted to assault the defendant with the shotgun, the defendant attempted to disarm the deceased, and in the struggle for pos*405session the gun- discharged with the fatal result. The defendant’s evidence, if believed, would warrant an acquittal.

The jury returned a verdict finding the defendant guilty of manslaughter. The court imposed a prison sentence of 18 to 20 years. After the verdict the defendant gave notice of appeal but, before it was perfected, withdrew it and entered upon the service of the sentence. In response to a petition we allowed the appeal to be docketed and argued here.

T. W. Bruton, Attorney General, Ralph Moody, Deputy Attorney General for the State.

J. Wilton Hunt for defendant appellant. •

Per Cueiam.

The defendant’s counsel (court-appointed for this appeal) has been diligent in reviewing the record of the trial. By proper exceptions and assignments of error he has challenged, both by brief and by oral argument, the trial court’s rulings on matters of law and legal inference of which his client complains, or of which the record furnishes ground for objection. After careful review, we conclude the court’s rulings on admissions and exclusions of evidence, as well as in applying the law to the evidentiary facts, were in accordance with the decisions of this Court. We are unable to find in this record any legal reason why the verdict should be disturbed.

No error.