Gordon v. State
| Citation | 149 So.2d 475 |
| Decision Date | 04 February 1963 |
| Docket Number | No. 42486,42486 |
| Parties | George A. GORDON alias George 'Doc' Smith v. STATE of Mississippi. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi |
Douglas C. Stone, Shields Sims, Columbus, for appellant.
Joe T. Patterson, Atty. Gen., by G. Garland Lyell, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.
This is an appeal from the Circuit Court of Lowndes County, Mississippi, where the appellant was indicted, tried, convicted and sentenced to death on a charge of rape. The case was here previously and was reversed. 243 Miss. 750, 140 So.2d 88
On this appeal there are only two questions involved: (1) The claim that the court committed reversible error in submitting to the jury the charge of rape, it being claimed by appellant that it should have been submitted as an attempted rape because of a lack of penetration; (2) It is also alleged in the assignment of error that after the jury had been deliberating approximately two hours the foreman came to the door, announced in open court that the jury had been unable to agree, that ten had voted for a verdict of guilty as charged, and two had voted for a verdict of guilty, but unable to agree upon the punishment. It was insisted that this was a verdict and the appellant should have been sentenced upon a verdict of guilty as charged but unable to agree as to punishment.
As to the assignment (1), it is unnecessary to detail the evidence. Suffice it to say it was ample to carry the case to the jury.
On assignment (2), the only thing that appears in the record concerning this issue is a motion by one of the attorneys for the appellant made at the conclusion of the case and apparently while the jury was still deliberating, in which it was asserted that the jury retired to consider their verdict, and after deliberation of approximately two hours, the foreman came in open court and announced to the court that the jury was ten to two: Ten for guilty as charged, and two for guilty as charged but unable to agree on punishment. It was moved that since the announcement of the foreman of the jury was a verdict of the jury, that such a verdict should stand and that a judgment should be entered on a verdict of guilty but unable to agree on the punishment.
The district attorney made a statement in contravention of the facts alleged, in which he stated that approximately two hours after the jury retired to consider its verdict, one of the jurors came to the door and announced in open court that the jury had not been able to reach an agreement; that he then started to say there were ten for the verdict of guilty as charged, and the judge interrupted and told him he did not want to know how they stood, but only wanted to know the number, and the juror then stated, 'ten to two.' Thereupon the court had the entire jury come out and take their seats in the jury box. He then inquired whether they had been able to reach an agreement. The jury announced they had been unable to reach an agreement. Thereupon the judge ordered the bailiff to take the jury to a cafe for their meal, and to lock the jury in the hotel for further deliberation, and have them back at the courthouse at nine o'clock the next morning.
No testimony of any sort was introduced upon this motion, but after the district attorney had controverted the allegations of the defense, the motion was overruled.
While the court made no statement as to the facts, the motion of the defendant and the statement of the district attorney both showed that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Greenlee v. State, 97-KA-00507-SCT.
...on appeal unless there has been a clear abuse of discretion." Dixon v. State, 306 So.2d 302, 304 (Miss.1975) (quoting Gordon v. State, 149 So.2d 475, 477 (Miss. 1963)). "The object of the jury system is to secure a verdict by a comparison of views and by agreements among the jurors themselv......
-
Jenkins v. Forrest County General Hosp., 56508
...suggested in the opinion, our standard of review remains manifest abuse of discretion, and there was none. Finally, in Gordon v. State, 149 So.2d 475, 477 (Miss.1963), this Court stated, "The circuit judge must be held impartial and unprejudiced in the absence of an express showing that he ......
-
McDonald v. State, 2002-KA-02051-COA.
...on appeal unless there has been a clear abuse of discretion." Dixon v. State, 306 So.2d 302, 304 (Miss.1975) (quoting Gordon v. State, 149 So.2d 475, 477 (Miss.1963)). If a trial judge believes there is a possibility that a jury might reach a verdict, he may return the jury for further deli......
-
Hawkins v. State
...to declare a mistrial is within the trial judge's discretion. Dixon v. State, 306 So.2d 302, 304 (Miss.1975) (quoting Gordon v. State, 149 So.2d 475 (Miss.1963)).Conclusion ¶ 20. To establish depraved heart murder, premeditation is not required. Miss.Code Ann. § 97–3–19(b) (Rev.2006). In th......