
    Walters v. State.
    
    (In Banc.
    Jan. 22, 1929.)
    [122 So. 189.
    No. 27763.]
    
      Collins & Collins and R. A. Wallace, for appellant.
    
      Rufus C'reeJcmore, Assistant Attorney-General, for the state.
    Argued orally by Jeff Collins and R. A. Wallace, for appellant, and Rufus Creekmore, for the state.
    
      
      Corpus Juris-Cyc References: Homicide, 30CJ, section 580, p. 329, n. 19.
    
   Anderson,' J.

The presumption of malice that goes with the use of a deadly weapon was completely overcome in this case by the eyewitnesses to the homicide. There was no material conflict in their evidence that the appellant committed the homicide in self-defense. Therefore there was no question for the jury to pass upon, and the court should have granted the appellant’s request for a directed verdict of not guilty.

Reversed, and appellant discharged.-  