Johnson v. State

75 Miss. 635
Mississippi Supreme Court·Decided March 15, 1898·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

Whitfield, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

A more unsatisfactory case, on the testimony, was, perhaps, never presented to an appellate tribunal. There was not a charge given on either side as to manslaughter, and yet, on the proof, we think there might have been properly a verdict of manslaughter.- We do not mean to say that a verdict of murder would be improper, on the testimony, if there had been no error of law; but, since a verdict of manslaughter might also be upheld, it was, in the distressingly conflicting state of the evidence, to the last, degree important that no error of law should have been committed. The third instruction for the state shut the jury up to a verdict of murder or nothing, and was, on the record, reversible error. The first instruction was also, in the state of the record, error, but, as it is nowhere assigned for error, we only notice it to preclude its being given again.

Judgment reversed, verdict set aside and cause remanded.

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

Johnson v. State, 75 Miss. 635 (Mich. 1898).

75 Miss. 635 (Johnson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

McMullen v. State
291 So. 2d 537 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1974)
Farr v. State
25 So. 2d 186 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1946)
Grant v. State
160 So. 600 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1935)
Rutland v. State
155 So. 681 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1934)
Myers v. State
147 So. 308 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1933)
Tatum v. State
107 So. 418 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1926)
Allen v. State
104 So. 353 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1925)
Martin v. State
73 So. 64 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1916)
May v. State
42 So. 164 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1906)