Lum v. State

Mississippi Supreme Court
Lum v. State, 66 Miss. 389 (Miss. 1889)
Arnold

Lum v. State

Opinion of the Court

Arnold, C. J.,

delivered the opinion, of the court.

There is no appeal-bond, or affidavit of inability to give such *390bond, or to make deposit of a sufficient sum of money to cover tbe estimated amount of costs accrued, and likely to accrue in the cause, as required by § 2335 of the code, and the judgment of the lower court has been superseded, and the prisoners discharged on bail, without authority of law.

Such bond, affidavit, or deposit, is required in order to stay the judgment from which an appeal is taken to this court, in all criminal cases; and taking bail and discharging the prisoner after conviction, on such appeal, is not authorized by § 2339 or any other provision of the code, until after § 2335 of the code has been complied with.

The appeal not having been taken and pérfected according to law, and there having been failure to'prosecute the same,

The motion to dismiss for the want of prosecution, is sustained.

Reference

Full Case Name
Pink and James Lum v. State
Cited By
2 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
Supreme Court. Appeal in criminal case. Bond for costs, or affidavit. An appellant in a criminal case may be released on bail, pending tlie appeal, under $ 2339, code 1880. But lie must also give a bond or a deposit for costs, or make affidavit of inability to do so, under $ 2335. If this is not done, the appeal will not be entertained. To discharge a prisoner on bail after conviction without a compliance with both sections is unauthorized.