Stoughton v. State
Stoughton v. State
Opinion of the Court
The prisoner was convicted in the circuit court of Perry county of the murder of J. A. Harvey. He moved for a new trial, because the verdict was contrary to law and evidence, and because the court erred in refusing charges asked by the prisoner, and in giving those asked by the district attorney. On thesé points we need make no comments. Indeed, on tbe charges we could not; they are not presented by bill of exceptions, but noted by the clerk as having been given or refused. The law of 1846 which provides for so noting charges that may be given or refused, and makes them part of the record, without bill of exceptions, applies only to civil cases. Hutch. Code, 893.
The case must turn on a different point; the wound was inflicted in Perry county, where the prisoner was indicted, but the death occurred in Harrison county. In such cases there is an express statutory provision, requiring that the indictment should be found in the county where the death occurs. Poindexter’s Code, 314. This statute seems to have been overlooked in the subsequent compilations, though it is not repealed; at least we have found no act repealing it. It simply provides, that the in
Wharton Am. Cr. Law, 1052, 1053; Wharton on Homicide, 254; Hawks., P. C., b. 2, c. 25, § 26; 1 Chitty Cr. Law, 178; 3 ib., 732; State v. Orrill, 1 Dev. 139; Commonwealth v. Linton, 2 Va. Cases, 205; Riley v. State, 9 Humph., 646; State v. Foumer, 1 Chev., 106; Nash v. State, 2 Greene (Iowa), 286; Rex v. Burdett, 4 B. & Ald., 95, 173; 2 Hawkins P. C., 302; 1 Stark C. P., 5, 6; Turner v. State, 28 Miss., 684; Riggs v. State, 26 Miss. 51; 1 Archbold Cr. Pr. & Pl., 892.
Reference
- Cited By
- 3 cases
- Status
- Published