State v. MILAM
Mississippi Supreme Court
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
- Counselman v. HitchcockSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Steele v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1898
- Powell v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1937
- Doyle v. WillcocksonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1918
- Spight v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1919
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Hentz v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1986
- Wright v. McAdoryMississippi Supreme Court · 1988
- State v. MyersMississippi Supreme Court · 1962
- Mattox v. CarsonDistrict Court, M.D. Florida · 1969
- Watts v. StateCourt of Appeals of Mississippi · 2002
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.