Pollard v. State, 44572
| Decision Date | 20 December 1967 |
| Docket Number | No. 44572,44572 |
| Citation | 205 So.2d 286 |
| Parties | Willie Mae POLLARD and Billie Mae Barberson v. STATE of Mississippi. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
R. Jess Brown, Jackson, for appellants.
Joe T. Patterson, Atty. Gen., by R. Hugo Newcomb, Sr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.
This is an appeal from the Circuit Court of Clay County, Mississippi, wherein appellants were tried and convicted of grand larceny and sentenced to four years in the state penitentiary.
In December, 1965, two or more law enforcement officers from the sheriff's office went to the home of appellants, served on them what purported to be a search warrant, and thereafter searched the house and surrounding premises where appellants resided, in an effort to find beer or whiskey. Neither whiskey nor beer was found on the premises and neither appellant was taken into custody. Shortly thereafter on the same day appellants were seen on Highway 50 east riding in an automobile driven by George Cannon. They were returning from a place known as the Quick Trip in Lowndes County. Mr. Raymond McClure, Deputy Sheriff of Clay County, and Mr. Jesse Smith, Constable of District 2, were patrolling Highway 50 east and were following the car in which appellants were riding. Mr. McClure testified that he noticed that the car was 'bobbing a little bit down the road so we stopped the car and got the driver out.' The driver readily agreed that the officers could search the car and the officers saw in a sack some beer which had been procured from the Quick Trip. The appellants were thereupon arrested and placed in the county jail at West Point. It is irrelevant and unnecessary for us to determine whether or not probable cause for the arrest existed.
The record discloses, as shown by Sheriff Joe Strickland's testimony, that after being incarcerated in the jail appellants asked to be permitted to make bond and were assured they could do so provided it was a cash bond. However, appellants were unable to make a cash bond. They stated that the reason they wanted to make bond was because they had livestock on their premises which would have to be taken care of and watered. Sheriff Strickland stated that he could not permit appellants to be released from the jail but explained that he and his men would
Sheriff Strickland further testified as follows:
So McClure and Smith voluntarily agreed to go down and see that the calves and so forth was properly watered, or had water, which they said well that would be all right, they would appreciate you doing that, so they went down and in the course or going to the barn or through the barn they came across this group of pigs, small pigs that was in the pen there with, adjoining or adjacent to some larger pigs, so they came back immediately and I was out at the time when they got back but they called me and I came back around to the jail or to the court house here and told me that they believed they had located the pigs that I had described to them, or I had described to McClure as stolen pigs, so I said, 'Well, we will go by and pick up Mr. Stewart and go on down there and tell him and see if he can identify the pigs.'
The record discloses that on Wednesday, December 8, 1965, Mr. Grover C. Stewart discovered that five pigs around six years old were missing from his place, and reported this fact to the sheriff. On the following Staturday, December 11, Sheriff Strickland with several others drove to Mr. Stewart's and asked him to get in the car and go with them to see if he could identify his pigs. All drove to the premises occupied by the appellants, and, after entering thereon, Mr. Stewart identified the pigs found there as his. The pigs were sacked up and taken back to Mr. Stewart's property.
Numerous assignments of error are urged, but the disposition of this case does not require our detailed consideration thereof. We address ourselves to two fundamental errors which are sufficient to require our consideration. At the outset, the testimony offered with reference to the original search of the premises and the arrest for the possession of beer is immaterial insofar as the merits of this case are concerned. We believe that the trial court granted appellants sufficient time in which to prepare themselves for trial, and sufficient continuances were allowed in order that this might be done. It is unnecessary for us to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Canning v. State, 45479
...1129 (1925); Polk v. State, 167 Miss. 506, 142 So. 480 (1932); Reynolds v. State, 136 Miss. 329, 101 So. 485 (1924); Pollard v. State, 205 So.2d 286 (Miss.1967); Cuevas v. City of Gulfport, 134 Miss. 644, 99 So. 503 (1924); Brooks v. State, 209 Miss. 150, 46 So.2d 94 (1950); 22 C.J.S. Crimi......
-
Walters v. Bd. On Law Enf't Officer Standards & Training
...Code Ann. § 25-61-1). Court filings are considered public records unless otherwise exempted by statute. Id. (citing Pollard v. State, 205 So.2d 286, 288 (Miss. 1967)); see, e.g., Miss. Code Ann. § 25-61-9 2018) (limiting public access to trade secrets and confidential commercial or financia......
-
Oliver v. Oliver (In re Estate of Oliver)
...is no need to consider whether the chancery court erred in striking this pleading. Leatherwood, 548 So. 2d at 399; Pollard v. State, 205 So. 2d 286, 287 (Miss. 1967) ("Numerous assignments of error are urged, but the disposition of this case does not require our detailed consideration [of t......
-
Watkins v. Green
...minutes are public records, open to the inspection of any interested person, especially litigants and their attorneys, Pollard v. State, 205 So.2d 286 (Miss., 1967). The names of those actually summoned for jury service are drawn by the Circuit Judge, by chance, from the master jury box pri......