Pace v. State, 38853
| Decision Date | 02 November 1953 |
| Docket Number | No. 38853,38853 |
| Citation | 67 So.2d 521,218 Miss. 614 |
| Parties | PACE v. STATE. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
E. W. Holmes, Jr., Robert D. Patterson, Aberdeen, for appellant.
J. P. Coleman, Atty. Gen., By John E. Stone, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
On April 24, 1952, Mary C. Lias, who resided in Monroe County, was robbed in her home by appellant, John Pace, a young white man, of a small sum of money and certain articles of personal property. The accused was indicted and tried at the October term of court thereafter and was found guilty as charged of the crime of robbery with firearms, and sentenced to serve a term of fifteen years in the state penitentiary.
Attorneys appointed by the court to defend the accused filed a suggestion in writing of his insanity at the time of the trial but before arraignment, wherein it was alleged that he was not capable of making a rational defense and that a jury should be impaneled to try, preliminarily, the issue of whether or not he was mentally capable of making a rational defense to the charge; and the record fails to disclose that there was any waiver of the request therefor as contained in the written suggestion of his insanity. Proof on this issue was heard by the trial judge, without a jury, on the 5th day of November, 1952, and the suggestion of insanity was overruled and no finding of fact was made by the trial judge, except by implication, on the issue presented by the proof on the suggestion of insanity. The court merely stated at the conclusion of the evidence introduced before him,
In support of the suggestion of the insanity of the accused at the time of the proposed trial, the defense introduced two local physicians who had known and treated the prisoner, and one of whom had been instrumental in having him committed to the insane hospital on two previous occasions, and they testified that he was then insane. The positive testimony of the two physicians in regard to the then insanity of the accused was not then contradicted by the sworn testimony of any medical expert and was corroborated by numerous incidents testified to by one of his brothers and his mother.
It was shown that in response to a dare, the accused had jumped off a bridge from a height of 50 feet into the water with his clothes and shoes on, and then a few minutes later repeated this performance; that he had drunk a half pint or pint of gasoline on one occasion; that he caught an average-size rattlesnake with a forked stick in the swamp, and clenched it by the neck and carried it home alive; that he had frequently had spells or fits during which he would foam at the mouth; and that he often threatened violence to members of his family without provocation; was destructive in breaking up things in the home; that he had once been bitten by a mad dog and had suffered ill effects from the threatment in connection therewith; and that he was badly injured by the bare rim of a wheel when a car ran over his head four years prior to the crime in question. While in jail awaiting the trial, he inflicted wounds upon himself, and one cut on his neck would have perhaps proved fatal if he had not been rendered medical aid without delay, according to the testimony of one of the local physicians.
In February of 1951 a prosecuting attorney in the State of Michigan filed an affidavit against the accused, charging him with burglary, and suggested that a time and place be appointed for hearing as to his alleged insanity; that thereupon the judge of the circuit court appointed a physician to examine him and report his findings in that regard. The report of the physician disclosed that the subject of the examination was unable to read and write and did not know the alphabet; that his mind had not developed and was yet that of a child; that his reason and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jaquith v. Beckwith
...224 Miss. 226, 79 So.2d 841; Davis v. State, 151 Miss. 883, 119 So. 805; Shipp v. State, 215 Miss. 541, 61 So.2d 329; Pace v. State, 218 Miss. 614, 616, 67 So.2d 521. When it is suggested to the court that the defendant is incapable of making a rational defense, it becomes the duty of the c......
-
Cox v. State
...decisions, the court must order a mental evaluation. He cites as support Barr v. State, 359 So.2d 334 (Miss.1978); Pace v. State, 218 Miss. 614, 67 So.2d 521 (1953); and Shipp v. State, 215 Miss. 541, 61 So.2d 329 ¶ 28. The cases cited by Shorty are all distinguishable from the case at bar,......
-
Rogers v. State
...205 Miss. 515, 39 So.2d 3; Musselwhite v. State, 215 Miss. 363, 60 So.2d 807; Shipp v. State, 215 Miss. 541, 61 So.2d 329; Pace v. State, Miss., 67 So.2d 521. The relationship of physician and patient did not exist. Hopkins v. State, 212 Miss. 772, 55 So.2d 467. Defendant had twice voluntar......
-
Emanuel v. State, 53175
...and it appears that he is sufficiently rational to make a defense. Barr v. State, 359 So.2d 334 (Miss.1978); Pace v. State, 218 Miss. 614, 67 So.2d 521 (1953); Shipp v. State, 215 Miss. 541, 61 So.2d 329 (1952); Williams v. State, 205 Miss. 515, 39 So.2d 3 (1949); Carter v. State, 198 Miss.......