Peebles v. State

Decided October 15, 1877

Mississippi Supreme Court · decided 1877-10-15

Hon. J. M. Arnold, Judge. The plaintiff in error was indicted for the larceny of a hog of the value of $12, the property of “Margaret Majors.” Upon the trial the evidence disclosed the fact that ‘ ‘ Clark Majors ” was the owner of the hog stolen, and the court ordered the indictment amended to correspond with the proof. The amendment • was accordingly made, and the accused excepted. 1. The statutes of amendment and jeofails do not apply to indictments. Bouv. L. Die. 2.

Relies on Miller v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1877-10-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently November 2011

10 state decisions

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 →

Chalmers, J.,

¶1delivered the opinion of the court.

¶2The only question presented is as to the constitutionality of section 2799 of the Code, which permits certain specified amendments in indictments. The question was fully considered in the case of Eliza Miller v. The State, 53 Miss. 403, and decided in favor of the constitutionality of the statute.

¶3In this case there was an affidavit submitted, on the motion for new trial, to the effect that defendant had been surprised by the amendment, and thereby prejudiced in making his defense.

¶4The circuit judge overruled this motion, stating in his order that he did so because no continuance had been asked, nor any intimation given that the defendant was in any manner hindered in his defense by the amendment.

¶5We think this action was correct. A defendant cannot proceed with a trial without objection, and, after conviction, claim that he has been damnified by an action to which he did not object.

¶6Judgment affirmed. ■