Warfield v. State
Elmore Warfield v. State of Mississippi
Syllabus
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Whittteld, 0. J.,
delivered the opinion of the court.
It is shown by tbe affidavit of Maganos that tbe defendant was out of tbe court room during a part of tbe time tbe petit-jury was being inipaneled. Tbe district attorney did not see proper to introduce any counter affidavit, nor was there cross-examination of the witness Maganos. It, therefore, on this record, remains true that the defendant was not in tbe courtroom during a part of the very important proceeding of impaneling tbe jury. Under the authority of Sherrod v. State, 93 Miss. 774 , 47 South. 554 , 20 L. R. A. (N. S.) 509, and various other authorities cited therein, this was fatal error.
*172 Wherefore the suggestion of error is sustained, the former judgment of affirmance vacated and set aside, and the judgment •of the court below is reversed, and the cause remanded for a new trial. Reversed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 11 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.