History
  • No items yet
midpage
Jones v. State
229 Miss. 437
Miss.
1956
Check Treatment
Arrington, J.

We have carefully considered the motion for a new trial based on the ground of newly discovered evidence. Assuming the truth of the newly discovered evidence, we are of the opinion it would not bring about a different result on a new trial. In fact, the newly discovered evidence would tend to corroborate the State’s witness Lipscomb as to obtaining the money which was the culmination of the criminal scheme. Redmond v. Marshall, 162 Miss. 359, 137 So. 733; Dement v. Summer, 175 Miss. 290, 165 So. 791; Black v. Stone County Lbr. Co., 216 Miss. 844, 65 So. 2d 256; Suggestion of Error *440overruled, 216 Miss. 844, 65 So. 2d 256; 39 Am. Jur., New Trial, p. 172, par. 165.

"We are of the opinion that the circuit court correctly overruled the motion for a new trial.

Affirmed.

Roberds, P. Jand Hall, Kyle and Gillespie, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Jones v. State
Court Name: Mississippi Supreme Court
Date Published: Dec 10, 1956
Citation: 229 Miss. 437
Docket Number: No. 40270
Court Abbreviation: Miss.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.