Hawkins v. State

Decision Date21 May 1956
Docket NumberNo. 40109,40109
PartiesRoss HAWKINS v. STATE.
CourtMississippi Supreme Court

R. S. Tullos, O. O. Weathersby, Raleigh, for appellant.

Joe T. Patterson, Asst. Atty. Gen., by J. R. Griffin, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

KYLE, Justice.

The appellant, Ross Hawkins, was tried and convicted at the regular October 1955 term of the Circuit Court of Smith County, on a charge of murder in the killing of his wife, Mrs. Jessie Hawkins, and was sentenced by the court to imprisonment in the state penitentiary for the term of his natural life. From that judgment he prosecutes this appeal.

This is the second time this case has been before us on appeal. See 80 So.2d 1. The first trial resulted in a verdict of guilty as charged, and the appellant was sentenced to suffer death by electrocution. Upon appeal to this Court, the judgment of the circuit court was reversed and a new trial granted because of the admission of incompetent evidence concerning the appellant's collection of the proceeds of life insurance upon the death of his son, which occurred several years prior to the death of Mrs. Hawkins, and the collection of disability benefits under a health and accident policy, which the appellant had purchased for himself, the collection of fire insurance on a gasoline service station, which had been damaged by fire, and the procurement of a policy of insurance on the life of his grandson in which the appellant was named as beneficiary. This Court held that the testimony relating to the above mentioned insurance, which tended to show the commission of other crimes, was in no way related to the crime charged in the indictment; that the testimony was incompetent and was so highly prejudicial that its admission constituted a denial of the appellant's right to a fair and impartial trial.

It is not necessary that we undertake to summarize in this opinion the testimony of the witnesses who testified during the second trial. The facts testified to by the witnesses during the second trial were substantially the same as the facts stated in our former opinion, not including, however, the facts relating to the insurance policies mentioned above. No reference was made to the collection of the proceeds of any of the above mentioned insurance policies during the second trial.

The only points argued by the appellant's attorneys as ground for reversal on this appeal are: (1) That the evidence offered on behalf of the State was entirely circumstantial and was insufficient to establish the appellant's guilt beyond every reasonable doubt and to the exclusion of every other reasonable hypothesis; (2) that the court erred in refusing to grant an instruction requested by the appellant which would have informed the jury that the State's evidence was entirely circumstantial; and (3) that the district attorney took an unfair advantage of the appellant in questioning him about the alleged 'accident' at the scene of the killing several days after the killing occurred, and that the district attorney was unfair in his method of cross-examination of the appellant during the trial.

But after a careful examination of the record we are of the opinion that, although there was no eyewitness to the killing other than the appellant himself, the evidence offered on behalf of the State was sufficient to support the verdict of the jury. The appellant claimed that his wife's death resulted from accidental injuries received by her when the front tire of the appellant's automobile blew out and the automobile ran off the road and hit a pine tree. The appellant claimed that his wife was riding on the front seat with him when the car struck the tree, and that she was thrown forward as a result of the impact and her skull crushed by coming in contact with a hinge or other metal part of the car above the instrument panel. ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Smith v. State
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • 19 Marzo 1986
    ... ... City of Biloxi, 453 So.2d 1037 (Miss.1984) ... Page 269 ...         We conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Smith a new trial. 3 ...         AFFIRMED ...         PATTERSON, C.J., WALKER and ROY NOBLE LEE, P.JJ., and HAWKINS, DAN M. LEE, PRATHER, ROBERTSON and ANDERSON, JJ., concur ... --------------- ... 1 For a better understanding of the facts of this case, see the opinion affirming the conviction on direct appeal, Smith v. State, 419 So.2d 563 (Miss.1982) ... 2 The allegation that the officer did not have a ... ...
  • Ruttley v. State, 97-KA-00783 COA.
    • United States
    • Mississippi Court of Appeals
    • 18 Diciembre 1998
    ...of a proper cross-examination. Intensity should not necessarily be equated with inequity in this instance. Hawkins v. State, 228 Miss. 209, 214, 87 So.2d 485, 487-88 (1956). And as for Ruttley's claim of cumulative error, it should suffice to say that where there is "no reversible error in ......
  • Brewer v. State
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • 7 Noviembre 1984
    ...845 (Miss.1968). Had he been questioned about totally unrelated criminal offenses, the case would be otherwise. See: Hawkins v. State, 228 Miss. 209, 87 So.2d 485 (1956). Even in that case, however, the question would be objectionable on the ground of irrelevance, and not a 5th Amendment Wh......
  • Moore v. State, 56885
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • 3 Junio 1987
    ... ... Therefore, we find no error under this assignment ...         Having found no reversible error the Court holds that the conviction and sentence of Donnie W. Moore should be and is hereby affirmed ...         AFFIRMED ...         WALKER, C.J., ROY NOBLE LEE and HAWKINS ... ...

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