Kellum v. State
Mississippi Supreme Court
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Clay County. HoN. W. M. Rogers, Judge. Simon Kellum was indicted for grand, larceny. He was tried and convicted. The verdict of the jury was as follows: “ We, the jury, find the defendí ” [or defendd] “ guilty as charged in the bill of indictment.” The defendant excepted to this verdict, and judgment having been rendered thereon, appealed to this court. Our statute is silent on what a verdict shall contain.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Clay County. HoN. W. M. Rogers, Judge. Simon Kellum was indicted for grand, larceny. He was tried and convicted. The verdict of the jury was as follows: “ We, the jury, find the defendí ” [or defendd] “ guilty as charged in the bill of indictment.” The defendant excepted to this verdict, and judgment having been rendered thereon, appealed to this court. Our statute is silent on what a verdict shall contain. We must therefore look to the common law and test this verdict by the principles of the common law. The verdict of the jury in this case does not name the…
1Opinion of the CourtArnold, J.
The judgment is assailed in this case on the ground that the verdict was defective and insensible. The only objections made to the verdict is that in it the jury used the word “defendd” instead of defendant, and thereby failed to designate the prisoner. We are unable to determine from the record whether the abbreviation employed by the jury is “ defendd ” or “ defendt,”. but whether it is the one or the other is immateriál.
There is no technical form of words in which a verdict is required to be rendered. Any words which convey, beyond reasonable doubt, the meaning and intention of the jury…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- State v. RyanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1868
- Hartford Fire Insurance v. GreenMississippi Supreme Court · 1876
3Cited by3 opinions
- Long v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1900
- State v. PrestonIdaho Supreme Court · 1894
- State v. SchweitzerIdaho Supreme Court · 1910