Ransom v. State, 54345
| Decision Date | 03 August 1983 |
| Docket Number | No. 54345,54345 |
| Citation | 435 So.2d 1169 |
| Parties | Charles Edward RANSOM v. STATE of Mississippi. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Sidney J. Martin, Greenville, for appellant.
Bill Allain, Atty. Gen., by Billy L. Gore, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.
Before PATTERSON, C.J., HAWKINS and DAN M. LEE, JJ., and SUGG, Retired Justice.
1
Appellant was convicted in the Circuit Court of Washington County on August 20, 1982, for possession of more than one ounce of marijuana with the intent to deliver. He was sentenced to serve a term of eight years in the custody of the State Department of Corrections.
The principal question in this case was whether the court erred in overruling appellant's motion to dismiss with prejudice under our speedy trial statute, Section 99-17-1 Mississippi Code Annotated (1976 Supp.). In his motion appellant alleged he had been indicted on October 29, 1981, filed a motion for a speedy trial on November 13, 1981, arraigned on November 23, 1981, and tried on August 20, 1982. He claims no prejudice resulting from delaying his trial until August 20, but contends he was tried on the 271st day following his arraignment in violation of section 99-17-1.
Section 99-17-1 was enacted in 1976 and became effective July 1, 1976. It provides:
Unless good cause be shown, and a continuance duly granted by the court, all offenses for which indictments are presented to the court shall be tried no later than two hundred seventy (270) days after the accused has been arraigned.
The State argues that in computing the 270 days prescribed in section 99-17-1, the day of arraignment should be excluded. We agree because the statute provides that offenses must be tried not later than 270 days "after the accused has been arraigned." This interpretation is consistent with Section 1-3-67 Mississippi Code Annotated (1972) which states the rule for computation of time when a number of days is prescribed. Section 1-3-67 reads as follows:
When process shall be required to be served or notice given any number of days, the day of serving the process or of giving the notice shall be excluded and the day of appearance included; and in all other cases when any number of days shall be prescribed, one day shall be excluded and the other included. When the last day falls on Sunday, it shall be excluded- ; but in other cases Sunday shall be reckoned in the computation of time.
Applying the provisions of sections 1-3-67 and 99-17-1, we hold that the date of arraignment, November 23, 1981, should be excluded and the date of trial, August 20, 1982, should be included in determining whether appellant was tried more than 270 days after his arraignment. Based on our interpretation of the statute, the following table demonstrates that appellant was tried on the 270th day after his arraignment.
MONTH DAYS
-------------- ---------
November, 1981 7 2
December, 1981 31
January, 1982
February, 1982 28
March, 1982 31
April, 1982 30
May, 1982 31
June, 1982 30
July, 1982 31
August, 1982 20 3
---------
270
We hold that appellant was tried on the 270th day following his arraignment...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Handley v. State
...of arraignment and inclusion of the date of trial and weekends, unless the last day of the 270 day period falls on Sunday. Ransom v. State, 435 So.2d 1169 (Miss.1983). Any delays in prosecution attributable to a defendant under either the constitutional or statutory scheme tolls the running......
-
Spencer v. State
...as well as intervening weekends unless the 270th day falls on a Sunday or a holiday. Handley v. State, 574 So.2d 671, 674; Ransom v. State, 435 So.2d 1169 (Miss.1983); Parkman v. Mississippi State Highway Comm'n, 250 So.2d 637, 639 (Miss.1971). Spencer was arraigned on April 24, 1989, and t......
-
Beckwith v. State, 91-IA-1207
...394 So.2d 871 (Miss.1981); Carlisle v. State, 393 So.2d 1312 (Miss.1981); Perry v. State, 419 So.2d 194 (Miss.1982); Ransom v. State, 435 So.2d 1169 (Miss.1983); Brady v. State, 425 So.2d 1347 (Miss.1983); Young v. State, 425 So.2d 1022 (Miss.1983); Gray v. State, 481 So.2d 763 (Miss.1985);......
-
Ross v. State, 89-KA-0069
...falls on a Sunday. Adams v. State, 583 So.2d 165, 167 (Miss.1991)- ; Handley v. State, 574 So.2d 671, 674 (Miss.1990); Ransom v. State, 435 So.2d 1169, 1169-70 (Miss.1983). If the state demonstrates good cause for the delay, the statutory clock is tolled; if the state fails to demonstrate g......