Gray v. State

Citations

• 90 Miss. 235
• 43 So. 289

Syllabus

<p>Criminal Law and Procedure. Homicide. Trial. -Remarles of court. Argument.</p> <p>On appeal from a conviction of manslaughter prejudicial error cannot he predicated of the fact: —</p> <p>(a) That the trial court inquired in the hearing of the jury, it being proposed to introduce in evidence a garment worn by defendant when arrested, “How could the witness know it was not chicken blood on the garment?”, the same not then having been identified and there being no evidence that it was bloody, or if bloody, where the blood came from, especially where the defendant subsequently testified that the garment was his and t-hat it was stained with decedent’s blood; or</p> <p>(5) That the prosecuting attorney inadvertently made certain memoranda on the back of an instruction for the state which the jury had while deliberating on the ease, it appearing that the jurors did not read the memoranda; or</p> <p>(c) That the prosecuting attorney in his argument said — there being evidence of which to predicate the statements — that the accused was as guilty as he could be; that he was a bloody assassin; that accused was an athlete and sprang to his feet and shot deceased in the back of his head and then shot another person; that accused murdered decedent in cold blood, and called on the jury whether they would put a stop to the homicides of which three or four had been committed within the last few months by ■ negroes, and that the proof showed that accused had not lived with his wife for two years.</p>