Eph. Woods v. The State
| Decision Date | 12 May 1890 |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
| Parties | EPH. WOODS v. THE STATE |
April 1890
FROM the circuit court of the second district of Yalobusha county HON. W. M. ROGERS, Judge.
In the indictment in this case it is charged that the defendant Woods "unlawfully did shoot and discharge a certain gun on the Water Valley and Coffeeville road, the same being then and there a public road and highway. Defendant was the only witness in his behalf, and as such denied his guilt. The court gave the following instruction for the state:
Defendant was convicted and sentenced. After motion for new trial overruled, he prosecuted this appeal.
Reversed and remanded.
I. T Blount, for appellant.
1. The first instruction for the state is upon the weight of evidence, and is clearly erroneous. Such an instruction was condemned by this court in Buckley v. The State, 62 Miss. 705.
2. The statute makes it an offense to "shoot in any street or highway." Code 1880, § 2941. The indictment charges the defendant with shooting on the highway.
The judgment should be reversed on the first error assigned.
T. M. Miller, attorney-general, for the state.
The motion in arrest of judgment was properly overruled. The verbal criticism of counsel is ingenious and interesting, in its philological aspect. But it is a legal anachronism to now plead to the sufficiency of an indictment that it charges a defendant with shooting on a highway, when the statute denounces shooting in the highway. The prepositions are interchangeable in this connection, just as they are in prosecutions for racing on the highway. In this sense what occurs on the highway must be held to occur in it also. The administration of the criminal law declines such subtle distinctions in definitions.
The case must be reversed, however, because of the error of the court below in granting the one charge asked by the state. The appellant was the only witness offered by the defense and this one charge is clearly obnoxious to the condemnation pronounced in Buckley v. The State, 62...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Keigans v. State
...851; Lang v. State, 42 Fla. 595, text 601, 28 So. 856; Hampton v. State (Fla.) 39 So. 421; Buckley v. State, 62 Miss. 705; Woods v. State, 67 Miss. 575, 7 So. 495; Muely v. State, 31 Tex. Cr. R. 155, text 168, 18 S.W. 411, 19 S.W. 915; Harrell v. State, 37 Tex. Cr. R. 612, 40 S.W. 799; Purd......
-
Blackwell v. State
...... argument was prejudicial to appellant's rights and. constitutes reversible error. . . Buckley. v. State, 62 Miss. 705; Woods v. State, 7 So. 495,. 67 Miss. 575; Glenn v. State, 2 So. 109; Brown. v. State, 23 So. 422; Townsend v. State, 12 So. 209; McEwen v. ......
-
Pendergraft v. State, s. 44106
...107 Miss. 552, 65 So. 583 (1914); Gaines v. State, 48 So. 182 (Miss.1909); Townsend v. State, 12 So. 209 (Miss.1892); and Woods v. State, 67 Miss. 575, 7 So. 495 (1890). In view of these authorities we are of the opinion the granting of this instruction was For the reasons stated we condemn......
-
Reed v. State, 41175
...to be error where defendant is the only witness in his behalf on the facts. Buckley v. State, 1885, 62 Miss. 705; Woods v. State, 1890, 67 Miss. 575, 7 So. 495; Townsend v. State, Miss.1892, 12 So. 209; Smith v. State, 1907, 90 Miss. 111, 43 So. 465; Gaines v. State, Miss. 1909, 48 So. 182;......