Steele v. State

Citations

• 76 Miss. 387

Syllabus

<p>1. Criminal Law. Juries. Special venire. Talesmen.</p> <p>When the whole record shows that the accused was not prejudiced thereby, it is not reversible error in á capital case to refuse, both before and after exhausting the regular venire, to receive as a juror a member of the special venire who was absent on the call thereof, but present when offered by the defense, and to thereupon order talesman to be summoned.</p> <p>2. Same. Accused as witness. Burdens.</p> <p>A defendant in a criminal case, who voluntarily becomes a witness, assumes the incidents and burdens attaching to that character.</p> <p>3. Same. Testimony of the accused. Sis cross-examination thereon. Code 1892. 1 1741. Act February 27, 1882. Laws, p. 109.</p> <p>Under, code 1892, (¡174L, and the act of February 27, 1882 (Laws, p. 109), making an accused person a competent witness in his own behalf, he maybe cross-examined touching his voluntary statements previously made in his own behalf, under oath, before the coroner or the committing magistrate. Jackson v. State, 56 Miss., 312, distinguished; Farkas v. State, 60 lb., 847, noted; Sillv. State, 64 lb., 431, cited and approved.</p> <p>Qucere; Is a voluntary confession, made under oath before a magistrate, admissible against the accused, in view of $ 1463, code 1892, providing that the officer “ shall take in writing any voluntary confession that may be made by the accused, not under oath? ”</p> <p>4. Same. Act of magistrate. Legality presumed.</p> <p>In the absence from the record of anything to the contrary, the appellate court will presume that the testimony of an accused person before a magistrate was given voluntarily, since it would have been illegal to compel him to testify.</p>