Skip to main content

Smith v. State

Citations

  • 58 Miss. 867

Syllabus

<p>1. Criminal Law. Application for continuance. Case in judgment.</p> <p>On the day fixed for his trial, S., who had been, indicted for murder, moved for a continuance of his case because of the absence of certain witnesses by whom he expected to prove his good character for peace in the neighborhood in which he resided, and the bad character for veracity of the principal witness for the State. The places of residence of the witnesses were not stated; nor does the record show any subpoena issued for them. Upon this application a continuance was granted. The case was then transferred to another county, and when it came on for trial there, S. again moved for a continuance upon the same showing, substantially, as that made on his first application. The affidavit upon which the application was based did not show that the witnesses named had ever been subpoenaed; nor did it allege that there were no other persons by whom the facts sought to be established could be proven. The Circuit Court overruled the second motion. Held, that the action of the court below was correct.</p> <p>2. Indictment. Form. Date of commission of offence.</p> <p>The charge in an indictment that the crime was committed on the “twentieth day of April, 1880,” is equivalent to a charge that it was done on the “ twentieth day of April, a. d. 1880.” But, under sect. 2803 of the Code of 1871, an indictment which avers no date for the commission of the offence is valid.</p> <p>3. Same. “ Contra forma.” Sect. 2884, Code of 1871.</p> <p>■ Under sect. 2884 of the Code of 1871, the words “contrary to the form of the statute ” are not essential to the validity of an indictment.</p> <p>4. Same. Indorsement of “filed.” Effect.</p> <p>The indorsement upon an indictment of the word “filed” by the clerk is sufficient evidence that the indictment was properly found by the grand jury and returned into court. Acts 1878, p. 199; Code 1880, sect. 3006.</p> <p>5. Criminal Law. Competency of juror. Conscientious scruples

Judges: Cooper

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

16 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.