Ryan v. State
| Decision Date | 06 October 1924 |
| Docket Number | 24215 |
| Citation | 136 Miss. 587,101 So. 381 |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
| Parties | RYAN v. STATE. [*] |
CRIMINAL LAW. Defendant, who testified before grand jury as to sale of liquor, could not thereafter be convicted of sale.
Defendant who was subpoenaed before the grand jury and voluntarily testified concerning sale of liquor, could not thereafter be convicted for sale thereof.
APPEAL from circuit court of Jasper county, HON. W. L. CRANFORD Judge.
J. Moody Ryan was convicted of selling intoxicating liquor, and he appeals. Reversed and remanded.
Judgment reversed, and case remanded.
Davis & Conner, for appellant.
In the trial of the case in court below, the defendant filed a special plea in bar and claimed immunity from prosecution in this case on the ground that he was subpoenaed before the grand jury at the instance of the state at the February A. D., 1924, term of the said circuit court, and was by the grand jury required to give testimony under oath of and concerning the identical sale and purchase of the liquor with which he was charged with having sold in this case.
The state admits the defendant was subpoenaed as a witness before the grand jury, and was asked about other violations of the law, and admits that the defendant did testify before the grand jury and did tell the grand jury under oath about the identical sale of liquor for which he was afterward tried and convicted, but the state alleges that the said testimony was given to the grand jury voluntarily by the appellant and that he was not entitled to immunity from prosecution because the defendant gave this testimony voluntarily, after he had been compelled, by the process of the court as a witness on behalf of the state, to appear before the grand jury. The case was tried in the court below on the state's theory from beginning to end, that the defendant was not entitled to immunity because he voluntarily told the grand jury about the alleged sale of liquor for which he was tried and convicted, and this too, in the face of the fact that the state's replication admits that the defendant was subpoenaed before the grand jury at the instance of the state, "and was duly sworn to testify the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, etc."
The pleadings in this case show on their face that the defendant was entitled to immunity. The testimony in the record shows affirmatively and without dispute that appellant was entitled to immunity. There was therefore no issue of fact to submit to a jury, and the giving of each and all of the instructions for the state was error. Lucas v. State, 93 So. 437; Turnage v. State, 99 So. 9.
F. S. Harmon, Special Assistant Attorney-General, for the state.
The appellant herein was summoned to appear before the grand jury of Jasper County, Mississippi, after he was indicted for violation of the liquor laws. He appeared before the grand jury and claims to have entered into a full and detailed discussion of the incidents bearing on the charge for which he was indicted and for which he had not yet been tried. Mr T. A. Massey, a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Billups
...v. State, 130 Miss. 8, 93 So. 437; Hosey v. State, 136 Miss. 5, 100 So. 519; Turnage v. State, 134 Miss. 431, 99 So. 9; Ryan v. State, 136 Miss. 587, 101 So. 381; Thornton v. State, 143 Miss. 262; Evans v. 157 Miss. 645, 128 So. 737. The lower court erred in not allowing the State to cross-......
-
Thornton v. State
...Turnage v. State, 134 Miss. 431; Hosey v. State, 136 Miss. 5; Triplett v. State, 136 Miss. 320; Suddoth v. State, 136 Miss. 742; Ryan v. State, 136 Miss. 587. these authorities, particularly the Lucas, Turnage and Ryan cases, we submit that the plea of immunity is good and that the appellan......
-
State v. Jackson
... ... testify." ... The ... exemption from punishment conferred by these statutes is ... valid (State v. Bramlett (Miss.), 47 So ... 433; Husbands v. State, 105 Miss. 548, 62 ... So. 418; Lucas v. State, 130 Miss. 8, 93 ... So. 437; Hosey v. State, 136 Miss. 5, 100 ... So. 577; Ryan v. State, 136 Miss. 587, 101 ... So. 381; Triplett v. State, 136 Miss. 320, ... 101 So. 501; Sudduth v. State, 136 Miss ... 742, 101 So. 711); and the courts generally hold that without ... it such statutes would violate the constitutional right of a ... person to refuse to testify to ... ...
-
Evans v. State
...for said offense. Wall v. State, 62 So. 417; Griffin v. State, 90 So. 81; Lucas v. State, 93 So. 437; Hosey v. State, 100 So. 577; Ryan v. State, 101 So. 381; Triplett v. State, 101 So. 501; Sudduth State, 101 So. 711; State v. White, 105 So. 500; Thorton v. State, 108 So. 709. Geo. T. Mitc......