White v. State

73 Miss. 50
Mississippi Supreme Court·Decided October 15, 1895·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Whitfield, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

“That a juror may be a witness on a trial before himself and his fellows is well settled. ” Roy v. Horsley, 25 Am. Rep., [51]*51540, note. A juror may always be a witness for either party, and still retain his seat as a juror. ’ ’ Fellows' Case, 5 Me., 335. To the same effect are Rex v. Rosser, 7 Car. & P., 648; 32 E. C. L., 803, a criminal case; Manley v. Shaw, 41 E. C. L., 200; 1 Car. & M., 361, a civil case; Thomp. & M. on Jur., § 216. It is held in State v. Jacob, 30 S. C., 131, s.c. 11 Am. St. Rep., 897, that a juror, in weighing the credibility of testimony, has a right to take into consideration his own knowledge of the character of the witness delivering such testimony — as to which we say nothing. In this case the jurors testified only to character.

We find no reversible error in the other assignments.

Affirmed.

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

White v. State, 73 Miss. 50 (Mich. 1895).

73 Miss. 50 (White v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Davis v. BARR, STATE TAX COMM.
157 So. 2d 505 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1963)
Lucas v. State
51 So. 2d 583 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1951)
State v. Stentz
63 L.R.A. 807 (Washington Supreme Court, 1902)