Home/Mississippi Supreme Court/Stanford v. State

Stanford v. State

76 Miss. 257
CourtMississippi Supreme Court
DecidedNovember 15, 1898
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 76 Miss. 257 (Stanford 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
Stanford v. State, 76 Miss. 257 (Mich. 1898).

Opinion

Whitfield, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The ‘ ‘ marking ’ ’ the indictment filed, dating it, and signing the entries on it, by the clerk, are made, by § 1316 of code of 1892, the exclusive “legal evidence of the finding and presentation of the indictment. ’ ’ This was not done in this case, at the term at which the alleged indictment was found. Ita lex soripta est. The demurrer should have been sustained.

Judgment reversed, indictment quashed and cause remanded. Appellant will be held to answer such new indictment as the grand jury may prefer against him.

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

Related

Curtis Valentine a/k/a Curtis Lee Valentine v. State of Mississippi
Mississippi Supreme Court, 2021
Carroll v. State
963 So. 2d 44 (Court of Appeals of Mississippi, 2007)
Wilson v. State
904 So. 2d 987 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 2004)
Donald Wilson v. State of Mississippi
Mississippi Supreme Court, 2003
Smith v. State
394 So. 2d 1340 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1981)
Jones v. State
356 So. 2d 1182 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1978)
Fairley v. State
138 So. 330 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1931)
Wooten v. State
125 So. 103 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1929)
Washington v. State
78 Miss. 189 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1900)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
76 Miss. 257, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stanford-v-state-miss-1898.