Carter v. State

Citations

• 99 Miss. 435
• 54 So. 734

Syllabus

<p>1. Criminal Law. Proceeding before grand jury. Presence of stenographer.</p> <p>Where a cause was under investigation by the grand jury, the district attorney had the testimony taken down by a stenographer introduced by him into the grand jury room for that purpose and all the stenographer did while in the grand jury room was to take down the evidence and this evidence was not discussed or commented upon in his presence by any member of the grand jury. Held, that this was not reversible error as the accused could not be prejudiced thereby.</p> <p>2. Same.</p> <p>Unless the court can say that a defendant was not prejudiced by the presence of an unauthorized party in the grand jury room the case will be reversed.</p> <p>3. Trial. Excluding the. public. Constitution, section 26.</p> <p>The discretion vested in the court by the Constitution, section 26, to exclude the public from a criminal trial is in the interest of the public morals, and whether it is exercised or not is a matter in which the defendant has no concern.</p> <p>4. Homicide. Admission of evidence. Harmless error.</p> <p>In a prosecution for murder wherein defendant was convicted of manslaughter, testimony tending to show neglect by the defendant of his wife under the facts of this case was harmless error.</p> <p>5. Cross-examination oe Accused. Harmless error.</p> <p>Wihere the defendant on cross-examination was asked by counsel for the state, if his wife would testify and also whether he would object to his wife being introduced as a witness for the state, and both these questions were objected to and the objection sustained by the court, held, that while these questions were highly improper and should not have been asked, it was not reversible error.</p> <p>6. Murder. Manslaughter. Instructions.</p> <p>Where a defendant charged with murder is convicted of manslaughter he is presumed not to have been prejudiced by any instructions . relating to the crime of murder.</p>