Roundtree v. State
| Citation | 107 Miss. 166,65 So. 125 |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
| Decision Date | 11 May 1914 |
| Parties | WESLEY ROUNDTREE v. STATE |
March 1914
APPEAL from the circuit court of Lincoln county. HON. D. M. MILLER Judge.
Wesley Roundtree was convicted of obtaining goods under false pretense and made a motion for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence. From an order overruling the motion he appeals.
Appellant was convicted of obtaining goods under false pretenses. After conviction he made a motion for a new trial, one ground of which is as follows: "The defendant says, further, that he should have a new trial, because since the trial in which he was convicted he has discovered new and material testimony, and such as would very likely change the result of the case, to wit: That another person, Jim Lyons, a few days ago admitted and confessed that he committed the identical crime of which defendant was convicted, and that he pleaded guilty to same before a justice of the peace, Hon. Luther Smith, of district No. 5 of Lincoln county." Appellant made affidavit in support of his motion to the effect that he had learned the facts set out in this motion after conviction, and his attorney made a similar affidavit. An affidavit was also made and filed by a man named Case setting up that "since the date of the conviction of Wesley Roundtree, Jim Lyons confessed and admitted to him (affiant) that he (Lyons) committed the crime of which Roundtree was convicted, and that in a new trial he would testify that such acknowledgment was made to him." The court overruled the motion for a new trial, and an appeal was taken.
Reversed and remanded.
Jas. F Noble, for appellant.
The most important thing to be considered is the confession of Jim Lyons and his plea of guilty. The motion for new trial properly supported by affidavits, and upon which testimony was introduced, sets up this ground. Lyons confessed to the commission of the identical crime of which Roundtree was convicted. Lyons testified that he plead guilty because he understood Saxon would prosecute him and because he thought it best for him to do so in order to get out of it. The state used Jim Lyons as its witness, and his testimony was straightforward and bears the mark of truth. And every particle of evidence introduced on the motion for new trial strengthens the defendant's contention.
The newly discovered evidence in support of the motion for new trial is material and vital. It is more than cumulative,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Fisher v. State
... ... J. 552; L. N. O. & F. R. R. Co. v ... Crayton, 69 Miss. 152, 12 So. 271; Williams v ... State, 99 Miss. 274, 54 So. 857; Weathersby v ... State, 95 Miss. 300, 48 So. 721; Patterson v ... Romspeck, 81 Ga. 808, 10 S.E. 9; Barrentine v ... State, 51 So. 275; Roundtree v. State, 107 ... Miss. 166; Campbell v. State, 123 Miss. 113; ... McDearly v. State, 52 So. 796 ... V. The ... court erred in permitting Dr. T. N. Dye over appellant's ... objection to testify to the physical condition of Lindsey ... Coleman on the morning after the water-cure ... ...
-
Warren v. Town of Booneville
... ... maintenance of the streets of the city? ... It is ... the long-declared law of this state that in the maintenance ... and repair of public streets and sidewalks the municipality ... is engaged in a corporate function. See Whitfield v ... ...
-
Powers v. State
... ... coram nobis ... Hawie ... v. State, 121 Miss. 197, 83 So. 158, 10, A. L. R. 205 ... All ... courts hold that one on trial for crime may as a defense ... offer evidence to show that another committed the crime ... Roundtree ... v. State, 107 Miss. 166, 65 So. 125; Brown v. State, ... 99 Miss. 791, 55 So. 961, 37 L. R. A. (N. S.) 345; ... Baldridge v. Stribbling, 101 Miss. 666, 57 So. 658; ... U. S. v. Mulholland, [168 Miss. 543] 50 F. 413; 3 ... Wigmore on Evidence, paragraph 1476 ... The ... lower ... ...
-
Chambers v. State
...further in allowing testimony from and about a mere witness than any Mississippi court has ever done in the past. See Roundtree v. State, 107 Miss. 166, 65 So. 125 (1914), and Brown v. State, 99 Miss. 719, 55 So. 961 (1911), 22A C.J.S. Criminal Law § 749, page 1115 (1961), says the reason f......