Legal Opinion

State v. MILAM

Mississippi Supreme Court

Decided November 13, 1950No. 37595PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Ethridge, O.

The problem here is to determine whether testimony before a grand jury by appellees, H. E. Milam and S. L. Milam, was given under such circumstances as to render it involuntary and therefore unusable as the basis of a criminal prosecution.

In September, 1948, H. E. and S. L. Milam operated a store in Crowder, Quitman County, Mississippi, which was burglarized. They suspected that Chism and Tiner had committed the crime and proceeded individually to try to arrest them on the highway. . Chism escaped but Tiner was “arrested” by them and taken to the sheriff. Tiner was there…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Counselman v. HitchcockSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  2. Steele v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1898
  3. Powell v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1937
  4. Doyle v. WillcocksonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1918
  5. Spight v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1919

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Hentz v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Wright v. McAdoryMississippi Supreme Court · 1988
  3. State v. MyersMississippi Supreme Court · 1962
  4. Mattox v. CarsonDistrict Court, M.D. Florida · 1969
  5. Watts v. StateCourt of Appeals of Mississippi · 2002

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API