Walden v. State
| Decision Date | 02 January 1922 |
| Docket Number | 22135 |
| Citation | 127 Miss. 486,90 So. 177 |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
| Parties | WALDEN v. STATE |
October 1921
APPEAL from circuit court of Holmes county.
Fannie Walden was convicted of murder, and sentenced to life imprisonment, and she appeals, and, the record not being sent up in time, she petitions for certiorari. Petition denied and overruled, and appeal dismissed.
Petition denied and overruled, and appeal dismissed.
Barbour & Henry and Boothe & Pepper, for appellant.
Frank Roberson, attorney-general, for the state.
The appellant was convicted of murder, and sentenced to life imprisonment in the penitentiary at the special June term of the circuit court of Holmes county. The certificate of appeal was filed on the 20th day of July, 1921. No record has reached this court, and this is a petition for certiorari filed on the 28th day of November, 1921. The motion was due to be filed the second Monday in October 1921, or before. The petition sets forth the indictment trial, and conviction, and the giving of the notice to the stenographer, and the petition for appeal with an affidavit of poverty, and that the appeal was granted. It then states: "Your petitioner further states that she is advised that her said appeal has been docketed in this honorable court subject to call on Monday, November 28, 1921, and she is further advised that the transcript of the record, proceedings, and evidence in the said case had before the circuit court has not yet been transmitted and filed in this honorable court, although your petitioner has done all within her power to obtain and have same filed for hearing at the time provided by law in this honorable court"--and winds up with a prayer for the issuance of the writ of certiorari.
No showing is made as to why the petition was not promptly filed when the court convened on the second Monday in October. The appellant is in default in applying for the writ, and when an appellant is in default a specific showing of what steps have been taken by the appellant to procure the record should be shown; and if no steps have been taken, it should set forth a proper showing why none were then taken. Where the appellant is in default, some showing should be made to excuse such default. The petition is signed by two firms of attorneys, but the petition fails to state when they were employed, or any reason for their failure to take prompt and proper...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Winston v. State
-
Cobb v. Frazer
...850, 80 So. 331; Turner v. Weaver, 126 Miss. 496, 89 So. 153. There is no sufficient showing of excuse for the default. Walden v. State, 127 Miss. 486, 90 So. 177. Consequently, under the provisions of Section 1966, Code of 1942, the appeal ought to be, and is, Motion sustained and appeal d......
-
Miller v. Phipps
...119 So. 170 152 Miss. 437 MILLER, STATE REVENUE AGENT v. PHIPPS et al. [*] Nos. 27617, 27618, 27619Supreme Court of MississippiNovember 19, 1928 ... Division B ... certiorari, the court would refuse to grant such ... application and would dismiss the appeal. Walden v ... State, 127 Miss. 486, 90 So. 177; Martin v ... Phelps, 53 Miss. 134; Y. & M. V. R ... Co. v. McGraw, 118 Miss. 850, 80 So. 331; ... ...
- Walden v. State