McDANIEL v. STATE

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Docket Number

No. 34700.

Attorney(S)

F.D. Hewitt, of McComb, for appellant. The first assignment of error made by the appellant is on the motion for a continuance and a failure of the state, the Sheriff, and the officers to furnish the defendant with a list of the witnesses in order that she may investigate the case and prepare the same for trial, this being a prerequisite to the trial of any case in any court, and it was a manifest error on the part of the court to overrule the motion. Bryant v. State, 172 Miss. 210, 157 So. 346; Lee v. State, 160 Miss. 618, 632, 134 So. 185. The court should have granted a continuance or should have granted the defendant a reasonable time after ascertaining the number and names of witnesses to make the investigation. The defendant had no information as to the number and kind and character of witnesses to appear against her, no time to interview or investigate or summon additional witnesses to contradict, or in any way properly set up her defense. Greek L. Rice, Attorney-General, by R.O. Arrington, Assistant Attorney-General, for appellee. The defendant in a criminal case is not entitled to a bill of particulars; the only information relative to the crime charged against him to which he is entitled being that set forth in the indictment. Westbrooks v. State, 76 Miss. 710, 25 So. 491; Quick v. State, 133 Miss. 634, 98 So. 108; Sanders v. State, 141 Miss. 289, 105 So. 523; 14 Am. Jur., Sec. 208, p. 913. Argued orally by F.D. Hewitt, for appellant, and by R.O. Arrington, for appellee.

Judges

Griffith, J., delivered the opinion of the court.

See more information ...

Smart Summary

Please sign up to generate summary.

McDANIEL v. STATE.

1. INDICTMENT AND INFORMATION.

A defendant in a criminal case is not entitled to bill of particulars.

2. CRIMINAL LAW.

In absence of statute so requiring, state is not bound to furnish to a defendant the names of the state's witnesses.

3. CRIMINAL LAW. Indictment and information.

A defendant charged with sale of intoxicating liquor was not entitled to names of witnesses intended to be introduced in behalf of state and to particulars as to time and place of alleged sale and persons present.

Griffith, J., delivered the opinion of the court.

Appellant was convicted in the county court upon an affidavit made by the county attorney charging appellant with the sale of intoxicating liquor. A few days before the trial appellant moved the court to require the prosecuting attorney to furnish the names of the witnesses intended to be introduced in behalf of the state, and the particulars as to the time and place of the alleged sale, and the persons present. This motion was overruled.

On the day of the trial appellant moved for a continuance on the ground that because not furnished with the information sought by the aforesaid motion, and having failed to obtain it otherwise after diligent effort, she had been unable to prepare her defense. This motion was overruled. The action of the court upon these motions is the basis of the first three assignments of error.

We have heretofore ruled in several cases that the defendant in a criminal case is not entitled to a bill of particulars. Westbrooks v. State, 76 Miss. 710, 25 So. 491; Quick v. State, 133 Miss. 634, 98 So. 108; Sanders v. State, 141 Miss. 289, 105 So. 523. And in the absence of a statute so requiring, the State is not bound to furnish to a defendant the names of the state's witnesses. 14 Am. Jur., pp. 913, 914, and the authorities therein cited. There is no such statute in this state.

We have examined the other assignments and do not find sufficient therein to require a reversal.

Affirmed.

McDANIEL v. STATE.

Comments