[Download] "Thomas v. Harrahs Vicksburg Corp." by Mississippi Court of Appeals # Book PDF Kindle ePub Free

📘 Read Now     📥 Download

eBook details

• Title: Thomas v. Harrahs Vicksburg Corp.
• Author : Mississippi Court of Appeals
• Release Date : January 23, 1999
• Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
• Pages : * pages
• Size : 71 KB

Description

Criminal Law — Homicide — Circumstantial Evidence — Sufficiency — Accomplices — Appeal — Review of Evidence — Rule Where Defendant Failed to Ask for New Trial. Homicide — Appeal — Sufficiency of Evidence — Extent of Review Where Defendant Did not Move for New Trial. 1. Where defendant in a criminal cause on conviction did not move for a new trial, the review of the evidence by the supreme court under the assignment that it is insufficient to justify the verdict is limited to the determination whether there is any substantial evidence to support it. Same — Joint Indictment of States Witness not Alone Sufficient to Make Him an Accomplice. 2. The mere fact that a witness for the state was jointly charged with defendant on trial for murder did not make him an accomplice; whether he was such being dependent upon whether the facts justified his indictment for the offense for which accused was being tried, and if in what he did he acted under compulsion of fear impelled by threats he was not an accomplice. Same — Circumstances Indicative of Guilt. 3. The facts that defendant, with others, was present at the homicide for which he was on trial; that he and another aided each other in removing blood from their person; that he took part in concealing evidence of the crime, and gave false explanations Page 615 of the absence of the deceased from the cabin in which the killing occurred, were circumstances indicating guilt, amounting to substantial evidence, the weight of which was for the jury. Same — Circumstantial Evidence — When Deemed Sufficient to Sustain Conviction. 4. Where, in a prosecution for homicide the state has made out a strong case of incriminatory circumstances against defendant which remain unexplained, sufficiently meeting the rule that where circumstantial evidence is relied upon for conviction, all the circumstances proved must be consistent with each other and with the hypothesis that the accused is guilty, and inconsistent with any other rational hypothesis, the verdict of guilty will not be disturbed on appeal.

Free PDF Download "Thomas v. Harrahs Vicksburg Corp." Online ePub Kindle