Spivey v. State
Citations
- 58 Miss. 858
Syllabus
<p>1. Criminal Law. Venue. Jurisdiction. Panola County.</p> <p>Under the act of 1878 dividing Panola County into two court districts, a conviction for murder in the district in which the homicide was not committed must he set aside for want of jurisdiction in the court.</p> <p>2. Same. Horhicide. Evidence. Declaration %n presence of accused.</p> <p>S. was indicted for the murder of B. On the trial, a witness for the State was permitted to testify, against the objection of the defendant, that the son of the accused, immediately after the killing, and in the presence of his father, called to his brother, saying, “ Kun here; pa has killed B.” Held, that this testimony was properly admitted.</p> <p>& Same. Homicide. Evidence. Correspondence.</p> <p>' On the morning of the 12th of June, 1880, S. wrote a note to B., informing him that if his mules should be found again in S.’s fieldhe would shoot them. B. replied by note, inviting S. to meet him after dinner at a place named, “and bring your shot-gun; we will try them; as I consider that it was a banter this morning.” About one o’clock of that day B. was at S.’s house, and asked him why he hadnotmet him as proposed. Angry words passed between them, and B. sent ■ for and obtained his gun; but nothing further then occun-ed, and B., with two or three companions, went to their field to work. About sunset of the same day they returned to the front of S.’s house, when B. dismounted from his mule and started into the house, but before reaching it was shot by S. Upon the trial of S., under an indictment for the murder of B., the notes above referred to were offered in evidence by the defendant, but were excluded by the court. S.’s defence was (and his evidence tended to prove it), that he killed B. because of a reasonable apprehension excited by the hostile demonstration of B., and honestly entertained by the accused, that he was at the time in imminent peril of some great bodily harm then about to be done him by B., to avert whi
Judges: Campbell
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
20 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Fisher v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1985-10-16· cited 457×
- Davis v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1996-06-27· cited 301×
- Hughes v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1999-03-31· cited 231×
- Harveston v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1986-08-20· cited 164×
- Pierre v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1992-07-29· cited 80×
- Shinall v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1967-06-12· cited 47×
- Day v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1991-11-06· cited 38×
- Stoop v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1988-10-05· cited 22×
- Thurmond v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1951-06-11· cited 18×
- Bell v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1895-03-15· cited 16×
- Cole v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1966-12-08· cited 15×
- Moriarty v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1885-04-15· cited 12×
- Carl Lee Jordan v. State of MississippiCourt of Appeals of Mississippi· 2016-05-24· cited 10×
- Richardson v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 2014-06-26· cited 9×
- Holt v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1900-10-15· cited 8×
- Robinson v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1959-01-26· cited 7×
- Moorman v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1915-10-15· cited 4×
- Tillman v. StateMississippi Supreme Court· 1955-11-07· cited 4×
- Jeffrey Keller Davis v. State of MississippiMississippi Supreme Court· 1992-06-05
- William Ray Hughes v. State of MississippiMississippi Supreme Court· 1996-11-20
Cites
1 case in this archive is cited by this case.
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.