Lee v. State

Decision Date23 June 1913
Citation62 So. 360,105 Miss. 539
CourtMississippi Supreme Court
PartiesROSA LEE v. STATE

March 1913

APPEAL, from the circuit court of Quitman county, HON. T. B WATKINS, Judge.

Rosa Lee was convicted of perjury and appeals.

The facts are fully stated in the opinion of the court.

Reversed and remanded.

Williams Shelton & Williams, for appellant.

One instruction was asked and given for the state, and it is respectfully submitted that this instruction was erroneous.

This instruction tells the jury that if they believe beyond a reasonable doubt that Rosa Lee swore that she saw Henry Stewart at her mother's house two or three days after the killing, and Henry Stewart brought the pistol and said he got it off of Wade Robinson the night of the killing; and that if they further believe from the evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, from the evidence of one witness and corroborating circumstances, or the evidence of two witnesses, that said statement was false, etc., then they will convict.

This instruction is erroneous in that it assumes that there were two witnesses who testified, when in fact there was only one, Henry Stewart.

It is erroneous, also, in that it assumes that there was corroborating evidence in support of the testimony of the only state witness, Henry Stewart, when his testimony and that of Rosa Lee, stood absolutely alone upon the main parts of the sworn statement of Rosa Lee upon which the perjury is predicated, to-wit, that Henry Stewart came to the house of the mother of appellant two or three days after the killing, brought the pistol and gave it to the mother of appellant; and the only matter in the alleged false statement upon which it is attempted, in any degree, to support the testimony of Henry Stewart is as to the question whether he actually got the pistol from the body of Wade Robinson after the killing, no support being given to his testimony that he did not get the pistol that night before the killing.

Whether he got the pistol from Wade Robinosn or not was immaterial in the decision of the question whether he so stated in the presence of appellant as she testified; and to prove that he did not get the pistol from the body of Wade Robinson after the killing, or even if the state had been able, as it was not, to show that Henry Stewart did not get the pistol before the killing, could not corroborate Henry Stewart, so as to allow the jury to consider this as corroborating Henry Stewart, would be to allow them to assume that Henry Stewart not having in fact got the pistol he would not so state to Rosa Lee, and therefore Rosa Lee testified falsely when she swore that he made the statement, not that Henry Stewart did in fact get the pistol from Wade Robinson that night, but that Henry Stewart said that he got the pistol from Wade Robinson that night; and the point at issue being did Henry Stewart speak certain words, to-wit: "I got the pistol off of Wade Robinson the night he was killed," we have, in the final analysis the uncorroborated testimony of Henry Stewart that he did not speak those words as the only evidence in the case. See Lum v. State, 64 Miss. 278.

Frank Johnston, assistant attorney-general, for the state.

The instruction granted for the state that is regarded as incorrect and unsound by the learned counsel for the appellant is as follows:

"We the court, instruct the jury that before they can convict the defendant they must be satisfied beyond any reasonable doubt by the testimony of one...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Hogan v. State
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • November 12, 1987
    ...So. 282 (1939); Gordon v. State, 158 Miss. 185, 128 So. 769 (1930); Johnson v. State, 122 Miss. 16, 84 So. 140 (1920); Lee v. State, 105 Miss. 539, 62 So.2d 360 (1913); Saucier v. State, 95 Miss. 226, 48 So. 840 (1909); Whittle v. State, 79 Miss. 327, 329, 30 So. 722 (1901); Brown v. State,......
  • Nash v. State
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • December 10, 1962
    ...assigned. Brown v. State, 57 Miss. 424; Lea v. State, 64 Miss. 278, 1 So. 235; Saucier v. State, 95 Miss. 226, 48 So. 840; Lee v. State, 105 Miss. 539, 62 So. 360; Johnson v. State, 122 Miss. 16, 84 So. 140; Wilbur v. State, 151 Miss. 837, 119 So. 303; Chenault v. State, 154 Miss. 21, 122 S......
  • Clanton v. State, 37690
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • February 5, 1951
    ...and corroborating circumstances, applies to the false swearing charged in the indictment. Brown v. State, 57 Miss. 424; Lee v. State, 105 Miss. 539, 62 So. 360. In the case of Lee v. State, supra, the court held that, in a prosecution for perjury, the State in order to make out its case mus......
  • Johnson v. State
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • April 12, 1920
    ...witness and corroborating circumstances. This being true, the present case falls squarely within the ruling of this court in Lee v. State, 105 Miss. 539, 62 So. 360, and other well-known adjudications. There were corroborating circumstances to aid the testimony of the mayor. Even a negro va......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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