Loeffler v. State, 52491
| Decision Date | 25 March 1981 |
| Docket Number | No. 52491,52491 |
| Citation | 396 So.2d 18 |
| Parties | Fred J. LOEFFLER v. STATE of Mississippi. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Richard V. Dymond and Jimmy D. Alexander, Gulfport, for appellant.
Bill Allain, Atty. Gen., by Marvin L. White, Jr., Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.
EN BANC.
WALKER, Justice, for the Court:
Fred J. Loeffler was convicted in the Circuit Court of the Second Judicial District of Harrison County of the crime of rape and sentenced to life imprisonment. He has appealed and we reverse and remand.
Since we are remanding the case for a new trial it is unnecessary to comment on the facts, except to say that the totality of the evidence of rape against the defendant was extremely weak. There is one assignment of error which requires that this cause be reversed and remanded, and that is that the lower court erred in permitting Detective Parham Bridges to testify during the prosecution's case in chief that it was necessary for him to file an affidavit and obtain a warrant charging Loeffler with unlawful flight to avoid prosecution. An objection to this line of testimony was overruled. Although the objection was general in nature and not specific, as we have stated it must be, Stringer v. State, 279 So.2d 156 (Miss.1973), we take note of it, under the circumstances, as plain error. Mississippi Supreme Court Rules, Rule 6; McMullen v. State, 291 So.2d 537 (Miss.1974). Unlawful flight to avoid prosecution is, of course, a separate crime. 18 U.S.C.A. § 1073 (1976). Although evidence of other crimes is admissible under certain circumstances, see e. g., Wilborn v. State, 394 So.2d 1355 (Miss.1981), we find no authority which holds evidence to be admissible that a criminal defendant has been charged with another offense connected in some way with the crime for which he is on trial.
We would add that on retrial the prosecution should avoid reference to the fact that the State of Tennessee employed attorneys, at the expense of its taxpayers, to represent Loeffler in the extradition proceedings, unless first injected into the case by the defendant. Evidence of Loeffler's flight, if there were any, may be established in other ways.
We find no merit in the other assignments of error.
For the foregoing reasons, this cause is reversed and remanded for a new trial.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Livingston v. State, 57198
...(Miss.1985); Hooten v. State, 427 So.2d 1388, 1391 (Miss.1983) (prosecution's failure to provide exculpatory material); Loeffler v. State, 396 So.2d 18 (Miss.1981) (general, not specific, objection to evidence of other crime); Brooks v. State, 209 Miss. 150, 46 So.2d 94 (1950) (evidence of ......
-
House v. State
...is obvious from the context, little of value is accomplished by insistence upon a technically correct objection. See Loeffler v. State, 396 So.2d 18 (Miss.1981). This is certainly true with so much of Dr. Tramontana's testimony as constitutes garden variety hearsay or improper bolstering of......
-
Dycus v. State
...now being tried. The facts of this case make it readily distinguishable from Tucker v. State, 403 So.2d 1274 (Miss.1981); Loeffler v. State, 396 So.2d 18 (Miss.1981); Massey v. State, 393 So.2d 472 (Miss.1981); Gray v. State, 351 So.2d 1342 (Miss.1977); and Sims v. State, 313 So.2d 27 Furth......
-
Davis v. State
...the indictment should not be admitted in evidence against the accused. Eubanks v. State, 419 So.2d 1330, 1331 (Miss.1982); Loeffler v. State, 396 So.2d 18 (Miss.1981); Massey v. State, 393 So.2d 472 (Miss.1981). However, there are certain well established exceptions to this rule. Where the ......