Johns v. State
| Decision Date | 06 December 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 46581,46581 |
| Parties | Jerry L. JOHNS v. STATE of Mississippi. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Guy C. Faggard, Pascagoula, for appellant.
A. F. Summer, Atty. Gen. by Karen Gilfoy, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.
Jerry Johns was convicted in the Circuit Court of Jackson County of arson and sentenced to ten years in the state penitentiary.
The state offered sufficient circumstantial evidence to make a jury issue as to the defendant's guilt. The defendant took the stand in his defense and gave an exculpatory version of how the fire occurred in which the front part of his parents' home was blown out and partially burned. A statement of the evidence would serve no useful purpose.
When the defendant was tendered to the prosecuting attorney for cross-examination, the following took place:
Q. And I believe you told this court and jury you had been convicted of stealing an automobile?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How many times?
A. Once.
Q. How about the 7-9-67 in Cumberland, Maryland, were you not A.W.O.L. and charged with automobile theft?
A. Yes, I have.
The court then excused the jury and the prosecuting attorney questioned defendant extensively but failed to show that the defendant had been convicted of any crime except the automobile theft in Federal court at Biloxi. The state failed to offer any evidence whatever contradicting defendant's statement (before the jury) that he had been convicted only once. The jury then returned and the court made the following ruling:
BY THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the defendant is required to answer concerning his convictions and the State has a right to ask him if he has ever been convicted of a crime. There is a lot of difference in being convicted of a crime and being charged with a crime, and if the prosecution asked him about charges, that was improper and you are requested to disregard anything of that nature.
It is contended that the court erred in not ordering a mistrial as requested by defendant.
The statutes 1 provide that a conviction may be given in evidence to impeach the credibility of a witness. These statutes, which must be strictly construed, permit a witness to be examined as to his convictions; and if he denies he was convicted, then he may be contradicted by proving the fact of conviction. Powers v. State, 156 Miss. 316, 126 So. 12 (1930). It is error for a prosecutor to ask a defendant if he has been 'charg...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Pruett v. State, 89-CA-0814
-
Murray v. State, 46878
...about his conviction of crime, but we have held that the statute must be strictly construed in favor of the defendant. Johns v. State, 255 So.2d 322 (Miss.1971); Berry v. State, 212 Miss. 164, 54 So.2d 222 The right to cross-examine a defendant with reference to his former convictions in or......
-
Mickell v. State, 96-CT-01032-SCT.
...So.2d at 334. In addressing the issue, the Court stated: In Stewart v. State, 263 So.2d 754 (Miss.1972), this Court, citing Johns v. State[ 255 So.2d 322 (Miss. 1971)], held that the state's cross-examination of an important defense witness to the effect that every place he had worked seeme......
-
Horne v. State, 55431
...error is concerned, reversal is required, even where the trial judge takes thorough and emphatic corrective measures. Johns v. State, 255 So.2d 322, 324 (Miss.1971). The state offers no substantive response to this, but objects that the record shows that Horne did not move for a mistrial. H......