Sullens v. State

• Decision Date: 10 November 1941
• Docket Number: 34822.
• Citation: 191 Miss. 856,4 So.2d 356
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court
• Parties: SULLENS v. STATE.

4 So.2d 356

191 Miss. 856

SULLENS v. STATE.

No. 34822.

Supreme Court of Mississippi

November 10, 1941

Watkins & Eager, of Jackson, for appellant.

Greek L. Rice, Atty. Gen., and R. O. Arrington, Asst. Atty. Gen for appellee.

ALEXANDER Justice.

Appellant was, after information filed and upon proper citation adjudged in constructive contempt of court and sentence imposed. The citation was based upon two newspaper publications written by appellant in the Jackson Daily News of which he is the editor. These publications were as follows: "That's a good show now being staged in the Hinds County circuit court room. Of course, some of the roles are unpleasant and rather poorly performed, but it is a good show nevertheless. On the stage or screen it would be well worth a price of admission. This suggests the idea that our statutes ought to provide an admission fee for court rooms when big human dramas are being staged. It would help a lot in defraying court expenses." This article was published June 10, 1941.

The second article published Sunday June 15, 1941, was as follows: "This is a law-abiding country (An Editorial) 'The mountain labored and brought forth a mouse.'

The criminal term of the Hinds county circuit court has adjourned and Judge Jeptha Barbour's widely-publicized moral crusade against liquor selling and gambling is at an end-for the present, at least.

There was much beating of tom-toms and sounding of loud alarm, but the net results were exceedingly small.

Hinds county will furnish only one new prisoner for the county farm and none of our so-called 'big-shots' are going to help with the cotton crop up at the Parchman farm.

A small group of the small fry, mostly negro workers at night clubs were given fines of $100 each.

The list of indictments returned was not greater than that of the average criminal court term, and the number of convictions was smaller than at former terms.

So it would seem that, in spite of the great volume of smoke, there was very little fire beneath-much noise, but no casualty list of consequence; much talk about notorious lack of law-enforcement in our county, but mighty little proof thereof.

All of this, of course, is unfortunate from any point of view.

An overwhelming majority of the people of Hinds county believe in orderly government and the proper enforcement of written statutes, but they are indignant and righteously resentful when an utterly false and exaggerated impression is created in the public mind that a saturnalia of crime flourished in the most important county of the state.

They do not believe, and they have not yet been furnished with reasons to believe, that such shocking conditions exist here, and until furnished with proof more positive than that offered at the recent Hinds county court term, they are justified in making emphatic denial.

More than that, our citizens have complete faith and unshaken confidence in the officers chosen by them for the work of law enforcement.

They do not believe, and have no good reason to believe, that Sheriff Frank Scott and the staff of efficient deputies chosen by him for maintenance of law and order have been negligent in their duties, or that they are in league with lawbreakers, yet that impression might easily be created in the outside world after all that has been recently printed and bruited about on the street corners.

On the contrary, the observant and intelligent citizens of Hinds county are emphatic in their belief that they have a capable, courageous and energetic corps of officers who enforce the laws with as much thoroughness as it is humanly possible to do and they regard it as not only unfortunate, but derogatory to the good name of our county and its citizenry that an impression to the contrary has been created in recent weeks.

The Hinds grand jury empanelled at the beginning of the recent term was composed of a group of citizens of a high standard of intelligence and integrity. Not a finer panel could have been found in the county. The jury worked diligently and faithfully, making a thorough investigation of conditions in the county, and at the conclusion of its labors made a report praising Sheriff Scott and his staff for 'tireless and effective efforts' in behalf of law enforcement.

The citizens of the county believe that was an accurate report and they accept it as such. They believe it in preference to any statements emanating from other sources. They surely give it credence above dirt-spilling by certain persons who have heretofore been discredited in the courts and shown to be persons unworthy of belief.

Hinds county does not claim perfection. We have the average number of sinners in our midst, but no more than the average. We have had in the past a character of law enforcement as good as that of any other county in the commonwealth. That is conclusively proven by the large number of indictments at court terms in former years when Judges W. A. Henry, Wiley Potter and Julian Alexander presided over our court terms.

Hinds is a large county-large in population and territorial extent. With law enforcement lax in our city and county during the era of remarkable growth it would have been comparatively easy to establish a lawless gang rule here, with organized crime of all sorts flourishing, but it hasn't happened. We have had but little in the way of major crimes and the calendar of minor crimes and misdemeanors has not been large enough to justify any sort of alarm or pointing the finger of scorn in our direction.

In brief, the people of Hinds county still have faith in their own standard decency, faith in their government, and faith in their law-enforcement agencies. They have never expected absolute perfection, because they know that it is impossible, and they will continue to pursue the even tenor of their ways as though that court term had never happened, but they want the world to know that they didn't like an impression to go out to the world that their county is a hotbed of crime and that liquor joints and gambling dens and other places of iniquity flourish here like the proverbial green bay tree. They know that simply isn't true, and they find it hard to understand what all the shooting was about at the recent court term."

The information as filed alleged that such articles "were intended to and calculated to, and did reflect on the dignity of the court, and did impede and hinder and embarrass the proper functioning of the court in its efforts to enforce the laws of the State of Mississippi, and brought the court into contempt and reflected on the court in such a way as to create a contempt * * *".

The question presented therefore is whether the publication of these articles constituted a constructive contempt of the court "while sitting", adjudged in the light of the circumstances attending their publication. These circumstances are as follows: the May 1941 term of the circuit court of the first district of Hinds county convened on the first Monday in May. On that day the grand jury was empanelled and charged. The record discloses that the learned trial judge delivered a vigorous charge denouncing the alleged prevalence of crime in the county, especially charging that gambling and the unlawful sale of intoxicating liquors were open and notorious and conducted flagrantly and defiantly. The judge not only demanded a thorough and courageous investigation of such crimes but stated that he would not discharge the body unless and until he felt that they had thoroughly examined these matters. A large number of indictments were thereafter returned by the grand jury and it was adjourned May 15th. Photographs were made in the court room of a large group of defendants under indictment. In the meantime, according to the statement by the trial judge, "After the Court had been in session the information came to me that these places had not closed; that they were more or less defiant of the Court, in disrespect of any authority or power the Court might have to enforce the liquor laws. A number of raids were made, and some of the same defendants who were then under indictment were found with substantial quantities of liquor in their possession; sales made by some of the defendants who stood indicted before the Court. I thereupon recalled the grand jury and told them in a very few words and told them there were other matters, not referring to what those matters were. The grand jury retired and again faithfully and diligently and honestly performed their duty and returned additional indictments; and the total number of persons indicted at the two sittings was 174." The judge further stated that he had been informed of deliberate efforts to tamper with jurors. Citation was in fact issued against a party in connection with an attempt to bribe a juror, and this matter was heard. Conviction for contempt followed. In the court's charge to the grand jury criticism was made of the board of supervisors for their failure properly to prepare lists of prospective jurors for the jury box.

The grand jury was reconvened June 4, 1941, at which time the learned trial judge again denounced existing lawlessness, and in his charge he openly rebuked the sheriff offering to furnish to him and his deputies names of persons who were daily violating the law as well as the names and photographs of the places where such violations occurred. Pursuant to an order of the judge the sheriff had all members of the board of supervisors brought before him, and according to an exhibit to the record "all were lined up in front of Judge Barbour as he made his charge to the jury". The board was again specially rebuked for failure "to have the registration books properly kept so that names drawn for jury service were available". ...