Under one phase of the evidence, the law of voluntary manslaughter was involved, and to instruct the jury on this subject was not error.
Under the Code, § 26-1007, in order to reduce a homicide from murder to manslaughter, the killing must be the result of a sudden heat of passion aroused by one of three conditions, to wit: "[1] If the deceased made an actual assault upon the accused; or [2] if the deceased attempted to commit a serious personal injury on the accused; or [3] when there are otherequivalent circumstances to justify the excitement of passion." (Brackets ours.) Ragland v. State, 111 Ga. 211, 214 (36 S.E. 682). "The passion must be aroused by a just cause, such as would produce the same state of mind on the part of the slayer as would an unjustifiable assault, or attempt to commit a serious personal injury, upon him." Gamble v. State, 58 Ga. App. 637 (2) (199 S.E. 662). "On the trial of one indicted for murder, a verdict finding the accused guilty of voluntary manslaughter is authorized where, from the evidence or from the defendant's statement to the jury, there is anything deducible which would tend to show that he was guilty of voluntary manslaughter, or which would be sufficient to raise a doubt as to whether the homicide was murder or voluntary manslaughter.Reeves v. State, 22 Ga. App. 628 (97 S.E. 115); May v.State, 24 Ga. App. 379 382 (100 S.E. 797). It is also well settled that it is the prerogative of the jury to accept the defendant's statement as a whole, or to reject it as a whole, to believe it in part, or disbelieve it in part. In the exercise of this discretion they are unlimited. Brown v. State, 10 Ga. App. 50,54 (72 S.E. 537); May v. State, supra." Cobb v.State, 60 Ga. App. 194 (3 S.E.2d 212). Applying these rules to the evidence and the defendant's statement, the jury were authorized to *Page 58 find that the defendant shot the deceased — not to save his own life or to prevent the commission of a felony upon him — but in hot blood engendered by the fracas which started in a room of the defendant's house, where the deceased struck the defendant with his fist, and culminated a few minutes later on the porch of the same house, while the deceased, with a rock in his hand, was advancing upon him. If they so found, the verdict of voluntary manslaughter, as returned by them, was warranted. Albert v.State, 70 Ga. App. 39 (27 S.E.2d 249); Henry v. State,56 Ga. App. 384 (192 S.E. 636); Jenkins v. State,123 Ga. 523, 526 (51 S.E. 598): Gresham v. State, 70 Ga. App. 80 (27 S.E.2d 463); Goldsmith v. State, 54 Ga. App. 268,271 (187 S.E. 694); Williams v. State, 125 Ga. 302,304 (54 S.E. 108).
The evidence authorized the verdict.
Judgment affirmed. Broyles, C. J., and Gardner, J., concur.