Defendant appeals from her conviction for voluntary manslaughter and from the denial of her motion for a new trial.
The evidence also showed that the deceased had a history of violence to his wife over the past 24 or so years, at one time hospitalizing her for an extended period; that she had, when taken to jail that night, a very severe lump and laceration on the back of her head which, according to the testimony of a police officer, was probably caused by something harder than a fist; that there were no eyewitnesses to what occurred; and that the deceased had many other cuts and wounds around the face and arm as well as the fatal chest wound.
1. On the general grounds, the evidence was sufficient to support a verdict of voluntary manslaughter.
2. Defendant contends the trial court erred in failing to charge the jury on involuntary manslaughter, thereby precluding its consideration of the lesser crime. She cites many cases for the proposition that where there is the slightest evidence, a court must charge on all grades of homicide. Unfortunately, we do not see even slight evidence which would support a charge on either form of involuntary manslaughter as defined in Code Ann. 26-1103. The number of wounds inflicted leaves no doubt on the question of intent or voluntariness. See Teal v. State, 122 Ga. App. 532 (177 SE2d 840)
; Carmichael v. State, 115 Ga. App. 591 (155 SE2d 439)
. The evidence paints a picture of either a woman provoked to such an extreme that she acted under a violent and irresistible passion, or a woman acting justifiably in self-defense. The jury had the benefit of full charges on both theories and made its choice.
J. Walter Cowart, for appellant.