State v. Simms
Decision Date | 30 April 1925 |
Docket Number | 11755. |
Parties | STATE v. SIMMS. |
Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
Appeal from General Sessions Circuit Court of Greenville County; E C. Dennis, Judge.
Colonel Simms was convicted of violating the prohibition law, and he appeals. Sentence set aside, and case remanded for purpose of resentence.
Dean Cothran & Wyche, of Greenville, for appellant.
J. G Leatherwood, Sol., and D. W. Smoak, both of Greenville, for the State.
These facts are stated in the record: The defendant was tried and convicted on January 25, 1924, in the court of general sessions for Greenville county, upon the third count of an indictment charging him with violating the prohibition law, and sentenced to four months' imprisonment, and to pay a fine of $500. The testimony by the state tended to prove that the defendant had a five-gallon jug of whisky in his barn, and that after the officers arrived the defendant went to the barn and broke the vessel. The defendant submitted testimony which tended to prove that the whisky was there in the possession of his negro employee, without defendant's knowledge or consent, and that the negro broke it and escaped through a window in the loft of the building. After the verdict the attorney for the defendant made an earnest plea for mercy, stating that the defendant was a farmer with a wife and one small baby, and had never been convicted of a violation of the law of the land before during his life.
The judge, in sentencing the defendant, used the following language:
The defendant thereafter, within the time provided by law, gave due notice of intention to appeal.
The exceptions are as follows:
"Specification: Where the liberty of a defendant is concerned, and he is to be tried, he has a right that everything appertaining to the case, in any way of evidence affecting the case, be in open court."
The case of State v. Harvey, 123 S.E. 201, shows that there was error on the part of his honor, the circuit judge.
In delivering the opinion of this court Mr. Justice Watts used this language:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Dumont
...barred the use of information offered by either the State or the defendant unless presented in open court. See State v. Simms, 131 S.C. 422, 127 S.E. 840 (1925); State v. Rice 145 Vt. 25, 483 A.2d 248 (1984); State v. Maxwell, 328 S.E.2d 506 (W.Va.1985). The ABA Standards for Criminal Justi......
-
State v. Lewis
...not be more emphasized than by the decisions in the case of State v. Harvey, 128 S.C. 447, 123 S.E. 201, and the case of State v. Simms, 131 S.C. 422, 127 S.E. 840. It true that in these two cases it related only to the imposition of a sentence after the judge had received information in a ......
-
State v. Bolin
... ... Const. art. 1, § 18." (Syllabus.) If the record showed ... that the presiding judge, except in open court, received ... information unfavorable to the defendant's case, his ... reputation, or his character, under the Harvey and ... Rickenbacker Cases, and State v. Simms, 131 S.C. 422, ... 127 S.E. 840, we would have to set aside the sentence, and ... remand the case for the imposition of a new sentence. But the ... record does not so show. We cannot hold, even when so ... suggested by the appellant, that the presiding judge acted ... contrary to the ... ...
-
State v. Rickenbacker
... ... crimes than the one for which he was indicted. The defendant ... relies upon two cases recently decided by this court to ... sustain the grounds taken in this position. State v ... Harvey, 128 S.C. 447, 123 S.E. 201, and State v ... Simms, 131 S.C. 422, 127 S.E. 840 ... The ... Harvey Case held that it was improper for the circuit judge ... to carry the solicitor and another person interested [138 ... S.C. 29] in the prosecution into his room and privately ... discuss the case against the defendant in the ... ...