In re Moore

• Decision Date: 24 March 1908
• Citation: 60 S.E. 947,79 S.C. 399
• Parties: In re MOORE et al. v. HUNTER. STATE
• Court: South Carolina Supreme Court

60 S.E. 947

79 S.C. 399

In re MOORE et al.

STATE v. HUNTER.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

March 24, 1908

Appeal from Common Pleas Circuit Court of Laurens County; Ernest Gary, Judge.

Ludie J. Moore and Tom J. Blalock were fined for contempt for attempting to improperly influence a juror, and they appeal. Affirmed.

Richey & Richey, for appellants.

R. A Cooper, Sol., for the State.

JONES J.

On May 17, 1907, Judge R. C. Watts, presiding in the court of general sessions for Laurens county, upon affidavit of J. K Templeton, issued a rule against Ludie J. Moore, Tom J Blalock, and others to show cause before the presiding judge at the next term of said court why they should not be attached for contempt for interfering or attempting to interfere with a juror in the discharge of his duties. Return to the rule was made before Judge Ernest Gary presiding at the next term of court, and he adjudged Ludie J. Moore and Thomas Blalock guilty of contempt, and imposed upon each a fine of $50, and in default of payment imprisonment in the county jail until they purge themselves of said contempt or be liberated by the further order of the court.

This is a proceeding and judgment in criminal contempt, and the appeal must be heard as if from a judgment in a criminal case. State v. Nathans, 49 S.C. 205, 27 S.E. 52. We cannot, therefore, review any question of fact, but can only inquire as to the jurisdiction of the court, and whether there was error of law. The jurisdiction of the court to punish for contempt is not disputed. The only question presented by the exceptions which we can consider is whether there was any evidence whatever tending to show contempt of court; for if there was no such evidence there would be reversible error of law. The affidavit of J. K. Templeton was: "That he was regularly drawn, and served, to act as a petit juror for the second week of the present term of court. That after he was served by the sheriff, to wit, on the 7th day of May, 1907, at Clinton, in said state and county, he was approached by one Tom Blalock, who asked deponent if he would not favor his friend, Mr. G. Wash Hunter, on his trial for murder. Deponent replied that he did not know anything about the case, that he had never heard the evidence, and that he could not express an opinion. Blalock then asked him (deponent) to say nothing about the conversation, and asked deponent to do all he could for Hunter. That on last Saturday,...