Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

191 Miss. 854

4 So.2d 355

McDaniel v. State

Mississippi Supreme Court

Decided November 10, 1941

Mississippi Supreme Court · decided 1941-11-10

Relies on Sanders v. State · Westbrooks v. State · Nash v. Smith

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1941-11-10

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently March 1979

20 state decisions

1201941195019601970decided

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 →

Griffith, J.,

¶1 delivered the opinion of the court.

¶2 Appellant was convicted in the county court upon an affidavit made by the county attorney charging appellant with the sale of intoxicating liquor. A few days before the trial appellant moved the court to require the prosecuting attorney to furnish the names of the witnesses intended to be introduced in behalf of the state, and the particulars as to the time and place of the alleged sale, and the persons present. This motion was overruled.

¶3 On the day of the trial appellant moved for a continuance on the ground that because not furnished with the *856 information sought by the aforesaid motion, and having failed to obtain it otherwise after diligent effort, she had been unable to prepare her defense. This motion was overruled. The action of the court upon these motions is the basis of the first three assignments of error.

¶4 We have heretofore ruled in several cases that the defendant in a criminal case is not entitled to a bill of particulars. Westbrooks v. State, 76 Miss. 710, 25 So. 491; Quick v. State, 133 Miss. 634, 98 So. 108; Sanders v. State, 141 Miss. 289, 105 So. 523. And in the absence of a statute so requiring, the State is not bound to furnish to a defendant the names of the state’s witnesses. 14 Am. Jur., pp. 913, 914, and the authorities therein cited. There is no such statute in this state.

¶5 We have examined the other assignments and do not find sufficient therein to require a reversal.

¶6 Affirmed.

/191/miss/854 · .json · Public domain