Buckner v. State
| Citation | 32 So. 920,81 Miss. 140 |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
| Decision Date | 03 November 1902 |
| Parties | HENRY BUCKNER v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI |
October 1902
FROM the circuit court of Adams county. HON. JEFF TRULY, Judge.
Buckner the appellant, and Dobins were jointly indicted for the murder of one Myers, a fisherman. Dobins, a severance having been had, was convicted, and sentenced to the penitentiary and appellant was separately tried, convicted and sentenced to be hanged. Dobins was the principal witness against appellant. Appellant's defense was an alibi. He proved his absence from the place where the murder was committed until or 3 o'clock in the afternoon of the day of the killing, and it was shown that he left the gin house about that time, alone; and it was not shown on the trial what time of day the killing occurred, but it was shown that the news of the killing reached the gin house after appellant left there, and the witnesses swore that when the body was found it appeared to have been dead for some time. Defendant, after conviction, made a motion for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence. In support of the motion he offered the affidavits of two persons to prove that they heard of the death of Myers as early as 11 o'clock A.M on the day he was killed, and also Offered the affidavits of himself and attorneys to the effect that they had exercised due diligence, and did not learn until after the trial that Myers was killed as early as 11 o'clock A.M. that day. The motion for a new trial was overruled, and defendant appealed to the supreme court.
Reversed and remanded.
Ernest E. Brown and K. Palmer Lanneau, for appellant.
The court erred in refusing to set aside the verdict and grant the defendant a new trial on ground of new discovered evidence. The news of the death of the fisherman did not reach Hargraves' gin until about 2 o'clock P.M.
It was therefore, of vital importance to show the murder was committed before defendant separated from his companions between 1 and 2 o'clock P.M. In support of the motion for a new trial, defendant filed the affidavits of Alex. Mazique and Walter Hall that they learned of the death of the fisherman between 10 and 11 A.M., and both swore positively that it was not later than 11 A.M. The affidavits of Buckner and his counsel were also filed that they had exercised due diligence and they did not learn until after the trial that it could be proven the fisherman was dead...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
De Angelo v. State
... ... M. during the time the proceeds of ... the alleged robbery were alleged to have been divided with ... the defendant ... Bryant ... v. State, 172 Miss. 210, 157 So. 346; McCearley v ... State, 97 Miss. 556, 52 So. 796; Bates v ... State, 32 So. 915; Buckner v. State, 81 Miss ... 140, 32 So. 920; Turner v. State, 89 Miss. 621, 42 ... So. 165; Weathersby v. State, 95 Miss. 30, 48 So ... 724; Williams v. State, 99 Miss. 274, 54 So. 857; ... Watson v. State, 96 Miss. 369, 50 So. 627; Campbell ... v. State, 123 Miss. 713, 86 So. 513 ... ...
-
Jones v. State
... ... had important and material evidence which he had discovered ... after his trial and did not know about at the time of his ... trial, and by reasonable diligence could not have known about ... Weatherby ... v. State, 95 Miss. 300, 48 So. 724; Buckner v ... State, 81 Miss. 140, 32 So. 920; Turner v ... State, 89 Miss. 621, 42 So. 165; White v ... State, 45 So. 611; Watson v. State, 96 Miss ... 369, 50 So. 627; Barrentine v. State, 51 So. 275 ... A. Q ... Broadus, of Purvis, for appellant ... A ... conviction may ... ...
-
Micker v. State
... ... Mexico, 119 C. C. A. 581, 201 F. 489; Bussey v ... State, 69 Ark. 545, 64 S.W. 268; State v ... Washington, 108 La. 226, [168 Miss. 694] 32 So. 396; ... State v. Myers, 191 N.W. 597; State v ... Moberly, 26 S.W. 364; People v. Fridy, 31 ... N.Y.S. 399; State v. Powell, 98 P. 741; Buckner ... v. State, 32 So. 920, 81 Miss. 140; Watson v ... State, 50 So. 627, 96 Miss. 369; Middleton v ... State, 113 So. 625, 22 Ala.App. 146; Inman v ... State, 115 So. 704, 22 Ala.App. 344; State v ... Glover, 73 So. 843, 140 La. 726; Barrentine v. State, 51 ... So. 275; 16 C. J. 1205 ... ...
-
Nash v. Smith
...Goard v. Hart, 8 S. and M. 787; Roundtree v. State, 107 Miss. 166; White v. State, 45 So. 611; Watson v. State, 96 Miss. 369; Buckner v. State, 81 Miss. 140. last-mentioned case, Buckner v. State, being a case where the facts set up for a new trial were practically identical with the facts ......