Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

167 Miss. 221

149 So 798

Grantham v. State

Mississippi Supreme Court

Decided October 9, 1933

Mississippi Supreme Court · decided 1933-10-09

Relies on Osborne v. State · Pickens v. State · Tate v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1933-10-09

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently June 2007

1 federal appellate · 16 state decisions

9019331940195019601970198019902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

McGowen, J.,

¶1 delivered the opinion of the court.

¶2 The appellants, Grantham, Dunn, and Broom, were jointly indicted for burglary and larceny of a dwelling house, the property of J. J. Shelton, Sr., convicted by a jury, and sentenced to serve a term of three years in the state penitentiary, from which an appeal is prosecuted.

¶3 As to appellants Dunn and Broom, there is not a scintilla of competent evidence of their guilt in this record. Witnesses testified that Grantham stated to them, long-after the completion of the crime, and after a conspiracy —if one existed — had been terminated, that he watched while Dunn and Broom entered the dwelling house. Of course, this testimony as to what Grantham said was competent as against himself, there being no question but that the dwelling house in question was burglarized, as alleged in the indictment, but such declarations, not *224 having been made in the presence of the other two appellants, Dunn and Broom, were not competent against them; and, when objection was interposed to this evidence against them,, the court should have sustained it as to the two defendants who were not present when Grantham made the confession. Lynes v. State, 36 Miss. 617; Foster v. State, 92 Miss. 257, 45 So. 859; Tate v. State, 95 Miss. 138, 48 So. 13; Osborne v. State, 99 Miss. 419, 55 So. 52; Pickens v. State, 129 Miss. 191, 91 So. 906.

¶4 In regard to the appellant, Louis Grantham, the case must be affirmed. There is no merit in the objections urged as to the alleged variance and amendment of the indictment or as to the instruction complained of, and there is no error as to Grantham.

¶5 Reversed and remanded as to appellants Dunn and Broom; affirmed as to appellant Grantham.

/167/miss/221 · .json · Public domain