Sanders v. State
Mississippi Supreme Court
From the circuit court of LaFayette county. Hon. Eugene Johnson, Judge. On the trial of the appellant, on an indictment for burglary, the assistant counsel for the prosecution, in his argument to the jury, used this language: “There was enough in this evidence to make it incumbent on the defendant to deny it, and he has not done so.”
Read the full summary
From the circuit court of LaFayette county. Hon. Eugene Johnson, Judge. On the trial of the appellant, on an indictment for burglary, the assistant counsel for the prosecution, in his argument to the jury, used this language: “There was enough in this evidence to make it incumbent on the defendant to deny it, and he has not done so.” Upon defendant’s objection, the trial court properly stopped counsel and told him that he could not allude to or comment upon the fact that the defendant had not testified in his own behalf, and told the jury that they must disregard what counsel had said. And…
1Opinion of the CourtCooper, C. J.
The judgment in this case must be reversed, and a new trial awarded, because counsel for the state, in his argument before the jury, commented upon the failure of appellant to testify. The statute expressly declares that ‘ ‘ the failure of the accused, in any case, to testify shall not operate to his prejudice or be commented on by counsel.” It is true, the court promptly rebuked counsel, and directed the jury to disregard the fact alluded to, and that counsel then asked that his remarks be considered as withdrawn. But, as we have heretofore decided, this did not cure the error. Reddick v.…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Livingston v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1988
- Monroe v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1987
- Wright v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 2007
- Peterson v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1978
- Lambert v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1946
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.