Breakfield v. State, 47268
| Decision Date | 02 April 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. 47268,47268 |
| Parties | J. O. BREAKFIELD v. STATE of Mississippi. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Singley & Morgan, James R. Davis, Ken Conner, Columbia, for appellant.
A. F. Summer, Atty. Gen., by Karen Gilfoy, Special Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.
The defendant was tried in the Circuit Court of Marion County for the murder of his wife. Upon conviction, he was sentenced to life imprisonment in the state penitentiary. Although the testimony was conflicting, there was sufficient evidence to sustain a finding of the following facts.
On the afternoon of September 19, 1971, Breakfield and his wife were visiting in the house trailer of Mrs. Pearl Batte on Highway 35, five miles north of Columbia, Mississippi. Mrs. Paul Davis, who lived next door to Mrs. Batte, was sitting on the front porch of her home when she heard arguing and the sound of breaking glass coming from the trailer. Another witness who was in the area at this time corroborated Mrs. Davis' testimony as to the disturbance from within the trailer, and further testified that he heard the defendant say, 'Woman, you don't believe I'll kill you, do you?' Breakfield left the trailer but returned shortly and threatened to shoot the door full of holes unless he was admitted. After he was again inside, the argument resumed and presently he and his wife emerged. Mrs. Davis, who was watching from her porch, stated that Breakfield fired a pistol into the ground and then laughed, saying, 'I scared you, didn't I?' Mrs. Breakfield walked over and got into her car with the defendant following her. After she was in the car, the defendant walked up to it and put his arms in the window. At this point the shooting took place. The evidence showed that approximately six shots were fired. The defendant then called to Mrs. Davis and upon her arrival at the automobile stated to her that his wife had shot herself. Mrs. Davis looked into the car and observed that Mrs. Breakfield had been shot over the left eye. Paul Davis went to the scene of the shooting with his wife, and helped the defendant move Mrs. Breakfield over to the other side of the automobile. The defendant got under the wheel and proceeded to the hospital but was involved in an accident while enroute. A witness who stopped at the scene of the accident testified that the defendant stated that he had been run off the road; he got his gun out to shoot the person who had run him off the road but accidentally shot his wife.
The defendant first complains of the admission on behalf of the state of the rebuttal testimony of Mrs. Mazie Forbes, who had worked for the defendant prior to the shooting. Among other things, Mrs. Forbes testified that the defendant and Pearl Batte were having an affair. Defendant contends that this testimony tended to show motive and should have been introduced in the state's case in chief. A review of the record reveals that throughout his testimony, the defendant professed great love for his wife; thus, this testimony can be considered to have been in proper rebuttal. Other parts of Mrs. Forbes' testimony tended to show that the defendant had spoken of taking his wife's life in the witness' presence, a fact which the defendant had denied on cross-examination. Finally, the record shows that the defendant was allowed to testify in surrebuttal to contradict the testimony of Mrs. Forbes. This Court has held that where surrebuttal testimony is allowed, the admission of questionable rebuttal testimony will not compel reversal. Gant v. State, 219 Miss. 800, 70 So.2d 28 (1954); Clark v. State, 181 Miss. 455, 180 So. 602 (1938); Roney v. State, 167 Miss. 827, 150 So. 774 (1933).
The next assignment of error is concerned with an instruction obtained by the state which told the jury that they could find the defendant guilty of murder if the deliberate design to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Smith v. State
...his case-in-chief of his great love for his wife, the State was entitled to put on testimony to the contrary in rebuttal. Breakfield v. State, 275 So.2d 860 (Miss.1973); See generally United States v. Delk, 586 F.2d 513 (5th Appellant by the testimony of himself and witnesses opened the doo......
-
Barnes v. State, 57863
...discretion must be afforded the circuit court, especially when the defendant is offered an opportunity for surrebuttal. Breakfield v. State, 275 So.2d 860 (Miss.1973). It was discretionary with the circuit judge in this case whether to allow this testimony in Clearly a sufficient predicate ......
-
Martin v. State
...testified in surrebuttal, and, assuming arguendo the rebuttal testimony was not proper, it was not prejudicial error. Breakfield v. State, 275 So.2d 860 (Miss.1973). Lastly, appellant did not object to the witness's testimony, and he cannot complain of same here. Baker v. State, 327 So.2d 2......
-
Carlisle v. State
...and should not have been allowed, and the verdict must, as a result, be reversed. The State has cited the case of Breakfield v. State, 275 So.2d 860 (Miss.1973), as authority that in some cases even when improper rebuttal testimony is given, it does not demand reversal if surrebuttal is off......