Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

290 So. 2d 628

Docket No. 47703.

Anderson v. State

William E. ANDERSON v. STATE of Mississippi.

Mississippi Supreme Court

Decided February 18, 1974.

Mississippi Supreme Court · decided 1974-02-18

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“[t]respass is necessarily a component of every burglary. Implicit in the verdict finding defendant guilty of burglary is the finding that he was guilty of the constituent offense of trespass, Section 91-17-87, Mississippi Code Annotated (1972). Inasmuch as the jury has found the defendant guilty of the greater crime, and the evidence of defendant's guilt of trespass is conclusive, the judgment is affirmed as a conviction of trespass, and the case is remanded for sentencing on that charge. See Washington v. State, 222 Miss. 782 , 77 So.2d 260 (1955).”

quoted by 3 later decisions, including Wells v. State, 656 So. 2d 1186 - Alford v. State

Relies on Washington v. State · Washington v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1974-02-18

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently June 2012

15 state decisions

7019741980199020002010decided

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 →

¶1Pittman, Pittman & Pittman, Jon Mark Weathers, Hattiesburg, for appellant.

¶2A.F. Summer, Atty. Gen. by Billy L. Gore, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.

¶3GILLESPIE, Chief Justice:

¶4Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Circuit Court of Forrest County convicting him of burglary with a sentence of imprisonment in the penitentiary for ten years.

¶5Viewed in the light most favorable to the state, we find that the evidence failed to show that defendant was guilty of any greater crime than trespass. Detailing the evidence would serve no useful purpose since a case with this unique set of circumstances is not likely to arise again. It is sufficient to say that the proof does show conclusively that defendant was guilty of trespass. The conviction of burglary is reversed, and defendant is discharged on that charge.

¶6Trespass is necessarily a component of every burglary. Implicit in the verdict finding defendant guilty of burglary *629 is the finding that he was guilty of the constituent offense of trespass, Section 97-17-87, Mississippi Code Annotated (1972). Inasmuch as the jury has found the defendant guilty of the greater crime, and the evidence of defendant's guilt of trespass is conclusive, the judgment is affirmed as a conviction of trespass, and the case is remanded for sentencing on that charge. See Washington v. State, 222 Miss. 782, 77 So.2d 260 (1955).

¶7Reversed in part, affirmed in part, and remanded for sentence.

¶8SMITH, ROBERTSON, WALKER and BROOM, JJ., concur.

/290/so2d/628 · .json · Public domain