Glenn v. State
| Decision Date | 09 May 1887 |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
| Parties | SAM GLENN v. THE STATE |
April 1887
APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Lowndes County HON. W. M. ROGERS Judge.
Sam Glenn was indicted for murder and was tried and convicted. The State introduced a number of witnesses. Glenn, the defendant, was the only witness in his behalf, and claimed to have committed the act in self-defense. The State obtained fifteen instructions, the eleventh of which was as follows:
The defendant appealed. The further facts necessary to an understanding of the case are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court.
Reversed.
S. M. & W. C. Meek, for the appellant.
The eleventh instruction for the State is erroneous and objectionable. Thomas' Case, 61 Miss. 65; Buckley's Case, 62 Miss. 706-707; Owen's Case, 63 Miss. 450.
We respectfully call the attention of the court to this instruction. It worked greatly to defendant's disadvantage in this case. He had no testimony but his own. Hence, the court should have been careful not to err in the giving of instructions for the State. This instruction was aimed at defendant.
T. M. Miller, Attorney General, for the State.
It cannot be assumed that the eleventh instruction was directed solely against the defendant.
The jury were not told, as in Buckley's, Thomas', or Owen's case, that they should consider the temptation the defendant was under to testify falsely, or on that account that they were at liberty to disregard his testimony altogether. It cannot be denied that the jury have a right to take into consideration the interest, situation, and motives of a witness, and to reject the testimony if they believe from all the evidence that he has willfully sworn to material falsehoods.
"Bloody instructions, which, being taught, return to plague the inventor." The giving of numerous instructions, drawn and passed on as they usually are, hastily, in the progress of a trial, is not of itself error, but it is very apt to lead to error. The dangerous practice of multiplying instructions for the State, in a simple case like the one before us, until fifteen were given resulted, as might have been expected, in fatal error.
The eleventh instruction given for the State intended, no doubt, to apply to appellant, who was a witness, and the only witness, in his behalf, informed the jury that in determining the credibility of any witness they might take into consideration, among other things, "proof of his having made statements which he denies under oath." A witness for the State testified that a short time before the homicide occurred, he heard ap...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Blackwell v. State
...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; v. State, 23 So. 422; Townsend v. State, 12 So. 209; McEwen v. State, 16 So. 242; Rucker v. State, 18 So. 121; Smith v. State, 43 So. 4......
-
Randal v. Deka
...find occasionally direct judicial condemnation of the indiscriminate use of the two words [Snowden v. State, 62 Miss. 100; Glenn v. State, 64 Miss. 724, 2 So. 109]; and authorities are plentiful in which their use interchangeably is deprecated, and the distinction pointed by such statements......
-
State v. Jennings, 37778
...falsity of defendant's testimony, and that in singling his testimony out the instruction assumed the discrediting facts. Glenn v. State, 1887, 64 Miss. 724, 2 So. 109. On the other hand, it is proper to instruct the jury that the testimony of an accomplice is to be weighed with caution. The......
-
Phillips v. State
...Miss. 111, 43 So. 465 (1907); Townsend v. State, 12 So. 209 (Miss.1892); Woods v. State, 67 Miss. 575, 7 So. 495 (1890); Glenn v. State, 64 Miss. 724, 2 So. 109 (1887); Buckley v. State, 62 Miss. 705 ...