Scott v. State

60 Miss. 268
CourtMississippi Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 15, 1882
StatusPublished
Cited by20 cases

This text of 60 Miss. 268 (Scott 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
Scott v. State, 60 Miss. 268 (Mich. 1882).

Opinion

Chalmers, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

Appellant was indicted in the statutory form for the murder of her husband, the indictment alleging that she “ wilfully, feloniously, and of malice aforethought killed and murdered ” him. There was no allegation of any assault or battery. Under this indictment she was convicted of an assault and battery with iutent to murder. Upon the comiug in of the verdict she moved in arrest of judgment upon the ground that she could not lawfully be convicted of the offence found, under the indictment preferred, which motion was by the court overruled.

The action of the court was erroneous, as shown by the case of Moore v. The State, 59 Miss. 25. A party can only be convicted of a lesser offence than the one charged where the lesser is specifically charged as constituting part of the higher, or by an added count, where the lower is necessarily included in the higher. Our statutory indictment for mnrder does not embrace in words a charge of an assault, nor is an assault necessarily included in an indictment for murder, since murder may be committed without the commission of an assault, as by laying-poison or digging a pitfall. The point is distinctly presented and decided in the case cited, supra. When the draftsman of an indictment adopts the statutory form of an indictment for murder, he must add a count for assault and battery, if he desires to fall back upon the lesser offence if the party should be acquitted of the greater.

Judgment reversed, verdict set aside, and the appellant remanded, to the custody of the sheriff of Marshall County for such action as by the district attorney may be advised.

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

Related

David Thomas v. State of Mississippi
249 So. 3d 331 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 2018)
Hall v. State
127 So. 3d 202 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 2013)
Odom v. State
767 So. 2d 242 (Court of Appeals of Mississippi, 2000)
Wolfe v. State
743 So. 2d 380 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1999)
Freddie Lee Wolfe v. State of Mississippi
Mississippi Supreme Court, 1997
Hailey v. State
537 So. 2d 411 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1988)
Johnson v. State
512 So. 2d 1246 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1987)
Faraga v. State
514 So. 2d 295 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1987)
Sanders v. State
479 So. 2d 1097 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1985)
State v. Rorie
114 S.E.2d 233 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1960)
Sullivan v. State
139 N.E.2d 893 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1957)
State v. Watkins
200 N.C. 692 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1931)
Bell v. State
115 So. 896 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1928)
State v. Watson
127 S.E. 637 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1925)
State v. Farnam
161 P. 417 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1916)
In re McLeod
128 P. 1106 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1913)
Smith v. State
55 S.E. 475 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1906)
Watson v. State
43 S.E. 32 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1902)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
60 Miss. 268, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scott-v-state-miss-1882.