Sanders v. State
| Decision Date | 04 December 1939 |
| Docket Number | 33864. |
| Citation | 192 So. 344 |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
| Parties | SANDERS v. STATE. |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Clay County; John C. Stennis, Judge.
" Not to be reported in State Reports."
Harvey Sanders was convicted of the crime of robbery with firearms and he appeals.
Judgment affirmed.
Wm. P Stribling, of Columbus, for appellant.
Greek L. Rice, Atty. Gen., by W. D. Conn, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen for appellee.
Appellant was indicted and convicted in the Circuit Court of Clay County, of the crime of robbery with firearms, and sentenced to the penitentiary for a term of twenty years. From that judgment he prosecutes this appeal.
There was no error in refusing a directed verdict of not guilty nor in refusing a new trial upon the ground that the verdict was not supported by sufficient evidence. There was ample evidence to support the verdict.
The argument that the verdict was the result of prejudice on the part of the jury against appellant is without any foundation whatever in the record.
It is contended that the instruction given for the State, in which the court told the jury, among other things, that " they did not have to know that the defendant was guilty in order to convict," was erroneous and misleading. Such an instruction, in substance, was approved by this Court in Allgood v. State, 173 Miss. 27, 161 So. 756; Sauer v. State, 166 Miss. 507, 144 So. 225; Tillman v. State, 164 Miss. 100, 144 So. 234.
The court refused an instruction, requested by appellant, in which there was an attempt to state the degree of proof necessary to convict when circumstantial evidence is relied on. There was no error in refusing such an instruction. This was not a case of circumstantial evidence; the proof of guilt was shown by an eyewitness. It is true that his direct evidence was supported by some circumstantial evidence; but that did not make it a circumstantial evidence case in which such an instruction would be appropriate.
The court refused an instruction requested by appellant denominated in the briefs as a " precautionary instruction" . By it appellant sought to have the court tell the jury to view with caution the testimony of interested witnesses. There was no error in refusing this instruction. The giving of such an instruction rests in the sound discretion of the presiding judge; and his refusal so to do is not reversible error. Watkins v. State, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Whittington v. State
...the instruction in Walton v. State, 212 Miss. 270, 54 So.2d 391 (1951); Bolin v. State, 209 Miss. 866, 48 So.2d 581 (1950); Sanders v. State, 192 So. 344 (Miss.1939). We perceived no error in granting the instruction in these In Collins v. State, 202 So.2d 644 (Miss.1967), Justice Inzer, sp......
-
Montgomery v. State, 56743
...the instruction is proper, Bunkley v. State, 495 So.2d 1, 4 (Miss.1986); Collins v. State, 447 So.2d 645, 646 (Miss.1984); Sanders v. State, 192 So. 344 (Miss.1940); Purvis v. State, 14 So. 268, 269 (18) The instruction must be given only where the prosecution is without a confession and wh......
-
State v. Miller
...and corroborative. People v. Masters, 219 Cal.App.2d 672, 33 Cal.Rptr. 383; Iwerks v. People, 108 Colo. 556, 120 P.2d 961; Sanders v. State (Miss.), 192 So. 344; State v. Ybarra (Mo.), 386 S.W.2d 384; State v. Mah Sam Hing, 89 Mont. 178, 295 P. 1014; Fisher v. State, 154 Neb. 166, 47 N.W.2d......
-
Evans v. Jackson City Lines, 38149
...under all the instructions given you in this case, then it is your sworn duty to return a verdict for the defendant.' In Sanders v. State, Miss., 1939, 192 So. 344, it was said that the giving of such an instruction rests in the sound discretion of the trial judge. It is in general terms an......