Ward v. State

43 So. 466, 90 Miss. 249
Mississippi Supreme Court·Decided March 15, 1907·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Calhoon, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The affidavit is not vitiated by charging that different articles stolen were the property of different persons, specifying the articles and owners. The only result would be, on the trial in this case, to compel the state to show a single asportation. However, it is plain that the article charged to be the property of Carrie Ryan was not hers. It was only promised to be given her, and never delivered. She could not have maintained replevin for it against Mrs. Howard. It is also plain that the evidence of ownership of any of the property by Mrs. Howard is mere hearsay, and cannot sustain' conviction.

Reversed and remanded.

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

Ward v. State, 43 So. 466, 90 Miss. 249 (Mich. 1907).

43 So. 466 (Ward v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Heard v. State
171 So. 775 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1937)
Smith v. State
121 So. 282 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1929)
Jimerson v. State
46 So. 948 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1908)
Dalton v. State
44 So. 802 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1907)