Aarons v. State

Mississippi Supreme Court

Aarons v. State

62 So. 419, 105 Miss. 402

CourtMississippi Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 15, 1913

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 62 So. 419 (Aarons v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Mississippi Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Aarons v. State, 62 So. 419, 105 Miss. 402 (Mich. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

Smith, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.-

Appellant, upon an information filed by the district attorney, was adjudged in contempt of court and sentenced to pay a fine of one hundred dollars.

The facts are: At the October term of the court below one Marvin McDaniels was indicted for murder. He was arrested while the court was in session, and two or three days thereafter had a subpoena issued for appellant as a witness in his behalf. This subpoena was returned “Not found,” and thereupon other subpoenas were issued, directed to the sheriffs of Amite, Franklin, and Lincoln counties, all of which were returned “Not found.’’ When his case was called for trial, McDaniels obtained a continuance on account of the absence of appellant and another. Appellant was in the town where the court was being held at the time of McDaniels’ arrest, but immediately left, and, instead of going to his home, absconded and concealed himself, so that he could not be found when-the subpoenas were issued for him.

The court was well warranted in believing that he absconded and concealed himself at the request of a brother of McDaniels, for the purpose of evading the service of the subpoena afterwards to be issued. This conduct of appellant was calculated and intended to impede, embarrass, and obstruct the administration of justice, and [406]*406therefore constitutes constructive contempt of court. Durham v. State, 97 Miss. 549, 52 South. 627. There is no merit in any of appellant’s contentions.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Smith, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.-

Appellant, upon an information filed by the district attorney, was adjudged in contempt of court and sentenced to pay a fine of one hundred dollars.

The facts are: At the October term of the court below one Marvin McDaniels was indicted for murder. He was arrested while the court was in session, and two or three days thereafter had a subpoena issued for appellant as a witness in his behalf. This subpoena was returned “Not found,” and thereupon other subpoenas were issued, directed to the sheriffs of Amite, Franklin, and Lincoln counties, all of which were returned “Not found.’’ When his case was called for trial, McDaniels obtained a continuance on account of the absence of appellant and another. Appellant was in the town where the court was being held at the time of McDaniels’ arrest, but immediately left, and, instead of going to his home, absconded and concealed himself, so that he could not be found when-the subpoenas were issued for him.

The court was well warranted in believing that he absconded and concealed himself at the request of a brother of McDaniels, for the purpose of evading the service of the subpoena afterwards to be issued. This conduct of appellant was calculated and intended to impede, embarrass, and obstruct the administration of justice, and [406]*406therefore constitutes constructive contempt of court. Durham v. State, 97 Miss. 549, 52 South. 627. There is no merit in any of appellant’s contentions.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

62 So. 419, 105 Miss. 402, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/aarons-v-state-miss-1913.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack