Dozier v. State
| Decision Date | 25 November 1963 |
| Docket Number | No. 42563,42563 |
| Citation | 157 So.2d 798,247 Miss. 850 |
| Parties | Frank DOZIER v. STATE of Mississippi. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
William V. Murry, Hattiesburg, for appellant.
Joe T. Patterson, Atty. Gen., by G. Garland Lyell, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.
This is an appeal from a verdict of the Circuit Court of Forrest County, convicting Frank Dozier of manslaughter and sentencing him to ten years in the state penitentiary. The jury verdict was, 'We the jury find the defendant guilty of manslaughter and ask for the leniency of the court.'
The assignment of error is in reference to the requested instruction for a directed verdict, and too, the contention that the verdict of the jury was contrary to the overwhelming weight of evidence.
The brief of the appellant is very short. As a matter of fact, it is only about four pages. It attempts to state some of the facts, but does not cite any law to substantiate any of the assignments of error.
The state's brief says no argument is made in support of the two alleged errors of the trial court, nor are any authorities cited in support of the alleged errors. For that reason, the state's brief contends, the assignment of error should not be considered by the Court, citing Bridges v. State, 154 Miss. 489, 122 So. 533, and also Johnson v. State, 154 Miss. 512, 122 So. 529.
Many fine briefs are filed which are of great assistance to the Court in reaching an opinion, and the majority of lawyers are to be complimented. The legal profession is a wonderful profession, and lawyers should represent their clients through final determination of their case in the Supreme Court. A brief is for the assistance of the Court, and the lawyers should go to the fullest extent in their presentations in the brief. The purpose of briefs and arguments is to present to the Court in concise form the points and questions in controversy, and by fair argument on the facts and law of the case, to assist the Court in arriving at a just and proper conclusion, and to notify opposing counsel of the questions to be presented and the authorities relied on in reference thereto. In other words, the purpose is to aid the appellate court in determining what the law is. 5 Am.Jur.2d, Appeal and Error, Sec. 684, p. 130.
Rule 7 of the Rules of the Supreme Court, Briefs, section (2) states:
'The contents of briefs are for the determination of counsel but those briefs are of most assistance to the Court in which there precedes the argument of counsel: first, a concise statement of the case so far as essential to an understanding of the questions presented for determination with specific references to the precise places in the record where the points discussed may be found; and secnd, a 'brief of the argument,' which should consist of the points or propositions of law, or fact, to be discussed with the citation of authorities relied upon in their support.'
We call the lawyers' attention to the able articles as to oral arguments and written briefs in the Supreme Court of Mississippi as follows: Anderson, The Brief on Appeal, 2 Miss.L.J. 263 (Feb. 1930); Roberds, Some Suggestions as to Oral Arguments and Written Briefs in the Supreme Court of Mississippi, 17 Miss.L.J. 115 (Oct. 1945), revised in 29 Miss.L.J. 403 (July 1958).
Judge Griffith applicably summarized the assistance of briefs to the Supreme Court in Johnson v. State, supra, which says:
"As far as...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Carney v. State, 57395
...legal authority and is therefore not properly before this Court. See Ramseur v. State, 368 So.2d 842, 844 (Miss.1979); Dozier v. State, 247 Miss. 850, 157 So.2d 798 (1963). VI. DID THE COURT ERR IN GRANTING INSTRUCTION Instruction S-3 reads as follows: The Court instructs the jury that the ......
-
Hoops v. State
...support propositions of law with reasons and authorities." Pate v. State, 419 So.2d 1324, 1325-26 (Miss.1982) (citing Dozier v. State, 247 Miss. 850, 157 So.2d 798 (1963); Johnson v. State, 154 Miss. 512, 122 So. 529 (1929); Bridges v. State, 154 Miss. 489, 122 So. 533 (1929)). As to consti......
-
Bennett v. State
...their functions as the finders of fact. Moreover, appellant has waived this assignment of error by not so arguing. Dozier v. State, 247 Miss. 850, 157 So.2d 798 (1963); Bridges v. State, 154 Miss. 489, 122 So. 533 (1929); and Johnson v. State, 154 Miss. 512, 122 So. 529 Appellant urges that......
-
Layton v. Layton
...notify opposing counsel of the questions to be presented and the authorities relied on in reference thereto." Dozier v. State, 247 Miss. 850, 851–52, 157 So.2d 798, 799 (1963). Because John did not raise these issues himself, Amanda has had no opportunity to respond to the dissent's argumen......