Shows v. State

Mississippi Supreme Court
Shows v. State, 103 Miss. 640 (Miss. 1912)
60 So. 726
Need

Shows v. State

Opinion of the Court

Need, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

Appellant was indicted for murder, convicted of manslaughter, and sentenced to the penitentiary for five years. The record shows ample evidence to justify the jury in its verdict, and, in truth, it appears to us that the defendant has received light punishment for his offense.

A motion was made by appellant to quash the indictment on the ground that the minutes of the court did not- show that the grand jury was sworn. Appellant contended that because a part of the minutes, which was interlined, and which showed that the grand jurors were sworn, as required by law, was in a different handwriting and ink from the body thereof, it therefore could be inferred that such -part was made some time. after the body of the order was written, and after the indictment was returned. We to not find in the record of this case any proof to sustain this contention. There can no presumption arise from the interlineation that it was an addition to the order, made at an improper time, and after the return of the indictment. The record shows that the grand jurors were sworn, and all formalities complied with. A public record imports absolute verity, and every public record is presumed to be correct. Such record must be tried by itself. 34 Cyc. 614; Mandeville v. Stockett, 28 Miss. 398; Shirley v. Fearne, 33 Miss. 653, 69 Am. Dec. 375.

We find.no reversible error in the remarks made by the district attorney. It appears that the appellant was properly tried and convicted.

Affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
Charles Shows v. State
Cited By
3 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
1. Criminal Law. Records of court. Presumptions. Misconduct of counsel. ■ Because that part of the minutes of the court which showed that the grand jurors were sworn, as required by law, were interlined in a different handwriting and ink from the body thereof furnishes no presumption, in the absence of proof, that such part was made some time after the body of the order was written and after the indictment was returned. 2. Public Records. Verity. Oonclusiveness. A public record imports absolute verity and every public record Is presumed to be correct and must be tried by .itself. 3. Criminal Law., Misconduct of counsel. The remark of a district attorney on the trial of a criminal case, that “if the jury did not convict on the testimony they might as well tear the roof off the courthouse, and throw the law books away” was not reversible error.