Tanner v. State
| Decision Date | 27 September 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. 43998,43998 |
| Citation | 190 So.2d 670 |
| Parties | J. C. TANNER v. STATE of Mississippi. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Merle F. Palmer, Pascagoula, for appellant.
Joe T. Patterson, Atty. Gen., by G. Garland Lyell, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.
J. C. Tanner, appellant, was convicted in the Circuit Court of Jackson County of manslaughter and was sentenced to ten years in the state penitentiary.
The evidence amply supports the conviction. Tanner was indicted for murder, but found guilty of manslaughter. He and his wife were estranged, and his wife and children were living with his mother-in-law, a short distance from Tanner's house. Apparently Tanner and Wayne Walker had been friends and fishing companions, but Tanner learned that Walker had been seeing his wife, and he had strong suspicions that they were having an affair. On several occasions Tanner hid himself where he could observe the house in which his wife was living.
On the day in question Tanner was at Walker's house, when Walker stated that he was going to bait some trout lines, and began getting his fishing gear together, along with a pistol. Tanner left before Walker departed, drove to his hime, and parked his car in the carport so it could not be seen. He suspected that Walker planned a clandestine meeting with his wife.
He picked up a large butcher knife, walked down the railroad track and hid at a point near the house in which his wife was staying. In the night he heard Walker come across the field and climb a fence. Soon Mrs. Tanner came out and joined Walker near the house, where they were standing close together. Tanner stood up, cried out that he saw them, and Walker dived under the house. Armed with the butcher knife, Tanner immediately followed him. During the ensuing struggle in the dark, Walker was cut five times, including a fatal stab in the heart area of the chest. Tanner then pulled Walker from under the house, obtained aid, and took him to the hospital. Upon arrival there, Walker was dead. Tanner went to the sheriff's office and reported the killing. Tanner claimed that he followed Walker under the house because he thought Walker had a gun, and he wanted to keep Walker from shooting him. Tanner admitted that he was angry and wanted to beat Walker up, but denied that he intended to cut or kill Walker. Walker had no gun or other weapon in his possession.
From this evidence, the jury would have been justified in finding Tanner guilty of murder, but instead concluded that the offense was manslaughter. Certainly the jury was warranted in so determining.
By the same token, there is no merit in appellant's contention that he was entitled to a peremptory instruction under the rule in the Weathersby case. Weathersby v. State, 165 Miss. 207, 147 So. 481 (1933). It is that when a defendant is the only eye-witness to a homicide, his version, if reasonable, must be accepted as true, unless substantially contradicted in material particulars by credible witnesses or by physical facts or facts of common knowledge. Here there were material contradictions of appellant's version by the physical facts and other evidence, including appellant's own testimony. He told police officers about most of the above circumstances, including the facts that he armed himself in advance with the butcher knife and hid near his wife's residence; that Walker made no overt act toward him, but ran under the house; and that he was angry and followed Walker immediately with the intent of injuring him. Moreover, the evidence reflects that Walker had no weapon in his possession, although he had left a pistol in his car some distance away.
On October 15, 1965, Tanner was arraigned and pleaded not guilty. The trial date of November 8 was agreed upon by the court and counsel, and both sides announced that they would be ready for trial at that time. On November 1, the State filed a motion for the court to have drawn a special venire of not less than forty qualified jurors, to be returned Monday, November 8, when the case was set for trial. On November 2 the court sustained this motion and ordered a special venire, returnable on November 8.
Appellant asserts that this was error, since the special venire was drawn only six days before the trial date, rather than on October 15th, when both sides announced they would be ready for trial on November 8th.
Mississippi Code Annotated section 1795 (1956) states:
'When any person charged with a capital crime * * * shall have been arraigned and the plea of not guilty entered, it shall be the duty of the court, upon the demand of the accused or the district attorney, to cause to be drawn * * * a special venire. Code Section 2505 provides:
Any person indicted for a capital crime shall, if demanded by him by motion in writing before the completion of drawing of the special venire, have a copy of the indictment and list of the special venire summoned for his trial delivered to him or his counsel at least one (1) entire day before said trial. * * * Miss.Code Ann. § 2505 (1964 Supp.)
Code Section 1798 provides that the laws in relation to the listing, drawing, summoning and impaneling of juries are merely directory. Miss.Code Ann. § 1798 (1956). A case...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Thomas v. State
...due process of law, this Court will not reverse." De La Beckwith v. State, 707 So.2d 547, 597 (Miss.1997). See also Tanner v. State, 190 So.2d 670, 672 (Miss.1966). Thomas asserts that the process was flawed because "the jurors in the Second Judicial District were picked from a list of pote......
-
Boyd v. State, 44502
...not invalidate the selection of the jurors. Furthermore, this Court has held this statute to be directional, not mandatory. Tanner v. State, 190 So.2d 670 (Miss.1966). The selection of a fair and impartial jury does not require proportionate representation of the races. Harper v. State, sup......
-
Avery v. State
...case there was no impact upon the juries and no semblance of dishonesty or unfairness in the selection of the jury. In Tanner v. State, 190 So.2d 670, 672 (Miss.1966), the Court held that no challenge to the array will be entertained unless there is radical departure from the statutory sche......
-
Porter v. State, 55711
...or informalities in summoning and impaneling juries unless there is a radical departure from the statutory scheme." Tanner v. State, 190 So.2d 670, 672 (Miss.1966). In the present case, the path not chosen was the safer of the two alternatives. With two alternate jurors, the trial judge cou......