Hill v. State

Citations

• 72 Miss. 527

Syllabus

<p>1. Cbimihax Pbocedtjbe. Continuance. Absent ivitnesses.</p> <p>It is reversible error, in a murder trial, to refuse a timely application for continuance where it appears that eight witnesses for defendant to prove an aMbi were not present on the trial, five of them being absent because the subpoena for them was, by mistake of the clerk, directed to the wrong county, another on account of sickness, and another for reasons not known, it appearing that, besides defendant, only one witness testified to the alibi, as against numerous witnesses for the state, who testified to the presence of the accused at the scene of the killing; and it appearing, further, that while, on the motion for a new trial, the affidavits of the absent witnesses were not introduced, this was because accused was in prison, and without family, friends or means to secure assistance.</p> <p>2. Same. Indictment. Separate cov/nts. Distinct offenses.</p> <p>It is bad practice to join in the same indictment counts charging distinct offenses, though of the same general character, committed at different times. Teat v. State, 53 Miss., 439.</p>