State v. Bollis

73 Miss. 57
Mississippi Supreme Court·Decided October 15, 1895·Published·Cited by 11 cases

Opinion

Whitfield, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

It is not necessary to aver, in an indictment under § 1026 of the annotated code of 1892, or to prove on the trial thereunder, that the “pistol ” was loaded. A pistol is one of the class of weapons denominated by the statute ‘ ‘ deadly, ’ ’ and commonly spoken of as deadly. To hold that, to make it a deadly weapon within the meaning of this statute, it must be ‘ ‘ loaded, ’ ’ would be (1) to read the word “ loaded ” into the statute, and (2) practically to nullify the beneficent purpose of the law. Under such a construction, nothing could be easier than to carry the pistol in one pocket and the cartridges in another, and, when desired, load quickly, and take life. The statute was enacted in the interest of the preservation of life, by affixing the stigma of the law of the land to him who carries a concealed pistol, loaded or unloaded, except in the cases allowed by the statute. There was error in the ruling of the court below. Gamblin v. State, 45 Miss., 658; Strahan v. State, 68 Miss., 347.

Reversed.

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

State v. Bollis, 73 Miss. 57 (Mich. 1895).

73 Miss. 57 (State v. Bollis) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Davis v. State
530 So. 2d 694 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1988)
State v. Dorsey
491 S.W.2d 301 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1973)
Reed v. State
199 So. 2d 803 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1967)
Cittadino v. State
24 So. 2d 93 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1945)
People v. Padilla
45 P.R. 264 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1933)
Pueblo v. Padilla
45 P.R. Dec. 273 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1933)
Mularkey v. State
230 N.W. 76 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1930)
State v. Kowertz
25 S.W.2d 113 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1930)
State v. Riles
204 S.W. 1 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1918)
People v. Williamson
166 N.W. 917 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1918)