Sullivan v. State

101 So. 683, 136 Miss. 773, 1924 Miss. LEXIS 162
Mississippi Supreme Court·Decided November 10, 1924·No. No. 24260·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Sykes, P. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

Appellants were jointly indicted, tried, and convicted of the crime of adultery, and prosecute this appeal.

It is unnecessary to set out in detail the testimony. Suffice it to say that the only testimony tending to sustain the allegations of the indictment was that of the witness Mattie Ingram, who testified in- substance that these appellants stayed at her íiouse -for nearly a week, and there occupied the same room, and that on one occasion she saw them in bed together. The state, however, failed to prove that the home of Mattie Ingram at that time was in Simpson county. It devolved upon the state to prove the venue, which is jurisdictional, and for this failure the. judgment of' the lower court must be reversed, and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded

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

Sullivan v. State, 101 So. 683, 136 Miss. 773, 1924 Miss. LEXIS 162 (Mich. 1924).

101 So. 683 (Sullivan v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Nuckolls v. State
179 So. 3d 1046 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 2015)
Samuel Allen Nuckolls v. State of Mississippi
Mississippi Supreme Court, 2015
Crum v. State
63 So. 2d 242 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1953)
Street v. State
48 So. 2d 358 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1950)
Ussery v. State
123 So. 854 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1929)
Dorsey v. State
106 So. 827 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1926)