Dobbs v. State

Decision Date11 April 1910
Citation51 So. 915,96 Miss. 786
CourtMississippi Supreme Court
PartiesREUBEN DOBBS v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

March, 1910

FROM the circuit court of, first district, Chickasaw county, HON. JOHN H. MITCHELL, Judge.

Dobbs, appellant, was indicted and tried for, convicted of forgery and appealed to the supreme court. The instrument charged to have been forged was a check on a bank, payable to appellant, for $ 78, to which the name "I. W. Harrington" was subscribed. When the case was called for trial, the defendant moved for a continuance because of the absence of a witness, Willis Bean, who, appellant affirmed, if present, would testify that the son-in-law of Harrington, who had authority to do so, executed the check and delivered it to defendant in payment of a debt. A subpoena had been issued for the witness, but it had been returned "not found." The witness was shown by the application to be within the jurisdiction of the court and absent without defendant's connivance or consent. The district attorney agreed to admit that the witness would testify to the facts set out in the application, and the court thereupon overruled the application for a continuance and forced the defendant to trial. In view of the opinion of the court no further statement of the facts is necessary.

Reversed and remanded.

George T. Mitchell, for appellant.

The defendant's application for a continuance should have been granted. Havens v. State, 75 Miss. 488; Scott v. State, 80 Miss. 197; Watson v. State, 81 Miss. 700; Montgomery v. State, 85 Miss. 330; Caldwell v. State, 85 Miss. 383; Walton v. State, 87 Miss. 296; Watts v. State, 90 Miss. 757.

George Butler, assistant attorney-general, for appellee.

The trial court exercised a discretion in refusing the continuance and it does not appear that the discretion was abused.

OPINION

WHITFIELD, C. J.

The testimony of the witness Willis Bean was vital, and the refusal to continue on account of his absence, under the showing made in this record, was fatal error.

Reversed and remanded.

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Ivey v. State
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • 19 Noviembre 1928
    ... ... Miss. Code of 1917; Section 2211 of Hem. Code of 1917; ... Section 2209 of Hem. Code of 1917; Cook v. State, 43 ... So. 618; Shepherd v. State, 42 So. 544; Ellis v ... State, 107 So. 757 ... Defendant ... had right to continuance on ground of absence of witness ... Dobbs ... v. State, 51 So. 915; Cade v. State, 50 So. 555; ... Knox v. State, 52 So. 695 ... Truly & ... Truly, of Fayette, for appellant ... The ... judge has the power to pretermit court term ... Ex ... parte Caples, 58 Miss. 358; Section 745, Hemingway's Code ... ...
  • Samuels v. State
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • 11 Marzo 1929
    ...80 Miss. 197, 31 So. 710; Walton v. State, 87 Miss. 296, 39 So. 689; Vallm v. State, 96 Miss. 651; Anderson v. State, 50 So. 554; Dobbs v. State, 51 So. 915; Childs State, 146 Miss. 794, 112 So. 23. Irene Pilcher was only temporarily out of the jurisdiction of the court. The testimony shows......
  • Cox v. State
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • 9 Marzo 1925
    ... ... 809; Montgomery v. State, 85 ... Miss. 330, 37 So. 835; Caldwell v. State, 85 Miss ... 383, 37 So. 816; Walton v. State, 87 Miss. 296, 39 ... So. 689; Woodward v. State, 89 Miss. 348, 42 So ... 167; Watts v. State 90 Miss. 757, 44 So. 36; ... Cade v. State, 96 Miss. 434, 50 So. 554; Dobbs ... v. State, 96 Miss. 786, 51 So. 915; Brooks v. State, ... supra; Johnson v. State, supra; Williams v. State ... (Miss.), 23 So. 547; Magee v. State (Miss.), 45 ... So. 360; White v. State, supra; Anderson v. State ... (Miss.), 50 So. 554; State v. Vollm, 96 Miss ... 651, 51 So. 275; Knox ... ...
  • Corbin v. State
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • 15 Mayo 1911
    ... ... State, 33 So. 491; Fooshee ... v. State, 54 So. 148; Woodward v. State, 42 So ... 167; Watts v. State, 44 So. 36; Magee v ... State, 45 So. 360; De Sliva v. State, 45 So ... 611; Anderson v. State, 50 So. 554; Casey v. State, ... supra, cited; State v. Vollm, supra, cited; Dobbs v ... State, 51 So. 915; Knox v. State, 53 So. 695 ... In ... conclusion we unhesitatingly state, that after a careful ... consideration of this case, viewed in the light of the cases ... above cited, that this should be reversed on either of the ... above grounds first set out in ... ...
  • 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