Tennison v. State

Citation79 Miss. 708,31 So. 421
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
Decision Date17 February 1902
PartiesJOHN P. TENNISON v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

FROM the circuit court of Lowndes county. HON. EUGENE O. SYKES Judge.

Tennison appellant, was indicted for the murder of one Morris Dreese. He moved the court for a change of venue on the ground that he could not secure a fair and impartial trial in the county. The facts shown on this application are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court. The application was denied appellant was put upon his trial, was convicted of manslaughter, and sentenced to the penitentiary for a term of twenty-five years, from which conviction and sentence he appealed to the supreme court.

Reversed and remanded.

Z. P. Landrum, Jr., and James T. Harrison, for appellant.

Twenty or more unimpeachable witnesses testified that, on their belief, defendant could not have a fair and impartial trial in the county of the homicide, and most of those testifying contra, testified on cross-examination that their opinion that defendant could get a fair and impartial trial in the county was a general opinion, based upon their opinion of the good citizenship of Lowndes county, generally and absolutely, without reference to this case, they not pretending to know the general opinion or sentiment of the county upon this particular homicide.

As a matter of fact, over two hundred citizens were summoned from the body of the county before twelve men were gotten who would say that they were impartial, and against whom appellant knew nothing to the contrary. Talk of lynching was proved, inflammatory newspaper articles introduced, and it was abundantly shown that feeling against the defendant and talk of lynching him were especially strong in Columbus, where the trial was had. It was urged then, and is now urged, that, though you may succeed in getting a jury from the county who will say that they are impartial, and may be, in fact, at the start, yet that the case being tried in the town where the killing occurred, an almost mob of town spectators constantly in the audience, showing anger and indignation against the defendant in their countenance, smiling or laughing in scorn at evidence in his favor, showing the thunder-cloud brow when the evidence goes against him. And, added to these, the many and varied ways in which an unfriendly audience can throw its sentiment into a jury box, there was not only a reasonable doubt that defendant could have a fair and impartial trial, but it was certain that the audience would not believe anything testified to in his favor; and the audience comes very near being the jury where the case is tried in a town where the town wants to hang the prisoner, and will hang him if he is acquitted.

Monroe McClurg, attorney-general, and Sykes & O'Neill, for appellee.

That the appellant had a fair and impartial trial cannot be questioned upon the record. That the jury acquitted him of murder, and found him guilty of manslaughter only, demonstrates that they were not prejudiced against him, and shows them to have been unduly merciful.

But the evidence, on the motion for change of venue, was insufficient to support the application; the circuit judge heard and carefully considered the testimony, and his judgment should not be set aside; certainly it cannot, in the light of the subsequent proceedings, be held to have been an abuse of judicial discretion. Appellant ought to congratulate himself on the result in the court below.

Argued orally by James T. Harrison, for appellant, and by Monroe McClurg, attorney-general, for appellee.

OPINION

WHITFIELD, C. J.

On the motion for a change of venue in this case, a large number of witnesses were examined, both on the part of the defendant and the state; and of the witnesses introduced for the defendant it is to be said that they came from nearly all the walks of life, and from every part of the county, and that their testimony, summed up, was of the strongest possible character to show that the appellant could not have had, at that term of the court, a fair and impartial trial in the county. The testimony shows substantially that public sentiment ran very high against appellant, and that this adverse sentiment was prevalent throughout the county especially in the city of Columbus, where the killing occurred; that so intense was this feeling that lynching was threatened, and, for fear of a mob, the jailer was notified; that on a preliminary trial, where the prisoner was denied bail, there was a very large attendance, many coming from the country, and that when the judgment of the court was announced there was vociferous applause, clapping of hands, rattling of sticks, and cheering. Many expressions were testified to, to the effect that defendant ought to be hung; and some of the witnesses testified, with great reluctance, that a fair and impartial trial could not be had, as, for instance, Mr. Flood, justice of the peace for district No. 2. It was evident that he did not wish to say a fair and impartial trial could not be had, if it could possibly be avoided, yet was driven to that conclusion by what he had heard. One witness stated that he thought it would be "almost an impossibility" for defendant to secure a fair trial, and this witness stated, when asked who he had heard express themselves: "It would be almost impossible for me to make an estimate. I have heard so much from the citizens of Columbus." Another witness stated that he heard it said that he ought to be hung without judge or jury; another one, that he had heard that, in the eyes of The public, he...

To continue reading

Request your trial
32 cases
  • Garrett v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • February 5, 1940
    ......State have never. been overruled. . . The. defendant on this appeal relies on the following cases for. the law to reverse the opinion of the lower court on the. motion for a change of venue. . . Saffold. v. State, 76 Miss. 258, 24 So. 314; Tennison v. State, 79 Miss. 708, 31 So. 421; Anderson v. State, 46 So. 65, 92 Miss. 656; Magness v. State, 103 Miss. 30, 60 So. 8; Keeton v. State, 132. Miss. 733, 96 So. 179. . . The. right to trial by an impartial jury is guaranteed by the. organic law of the state, and when it is ......
  • Sauer v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • November 7, 1932
    ......461, 19 So. 238;. Williams v. State, 95 Miss. 671, 49 So. 513;. Miller v. State, 99 Miss. 226; Irving v. State, 100 Miss. 208, 56 So. 377; Smith v. State, 101 Miss. 283, 57 So. 913; Haywood v. State, 90 Miss. 461, 43 So. 614; Permenter v. State, 99 Miss. 453, 54 So. 949; Tennison v. State, 79. Miss. 708, 31 So. 421. . . W. D. Conn, Jr., Assistant Attorney-General, for the state. . . Mere. formal and technical words are not indispensable if the. offense is certainly and substantially described in language. meaning the same as that set out in ......
  • Wexler v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • June 6, 1932
    ...... justice he shall be entitled to a fair and impartial trial. before a jury of unbiased, unprejudiced, and uninfluenced. citizens, and be tried before a court equally as unbiased,. unprejudiced and uninfluenced. . . Tennison. v. State, 79 Miss. 708, 31 So. 421; Magness v. State, 103 Miss. 30, 60 So. 8; Keeton v. State,. 96. So. 180; Brown v. State, 83 Miss. 645. . . The. right to trial by an impartial jury is guaranteed by the. organic law of the state, and when it is doubtful that such a. jury can be ......
  • Fisher v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • October 16, 1985
    ...accused of crimes are entitled to a fair trial, the innocent as well as the not so innocent. The point was well put in Tennison v. State, 79 Miss. 708, 31 So. 421 (1902): It is one of the crowning glories of our law that no matter how guilty one may be, no matter how atrocious his crime, no......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT