Case Title: Weaver v. State

Citation: 272 So. 2d 636

Docket Number: 

State: mississippi

Court: Mississippi Supreme Court

Date: 1973-01-22T00:00:00Z

Document:
272 So. 2d 636 (1973) Wesley WEAVER v. STATE of Mississippi. No. 47128. Supreme Court of Mississippi. January 22, 1973. T.N. Gore, Jr., Marks, for appellant. A.F. Summer, Atty. Gen. by Karen Gilfoy, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee. BROOM, Justice: In the Circuit Court of Quitman County, the appellant, Wesley Weaver, was convicted of a felony, to-wit: Assault and battery with intent to kill. He appeals from said conviction and assigns as error only that the jury which tried him was erroneously allowed to disperse and separate during the trial. The facts are simple. Before the testimony began, but after completion of jury selection, the following oral instructions were given the jury by the circuit judge prior to allowing the jurors to disperse for a fifteen minute break: Admittedly this took place in open court in the presence of the appellant and counsel who made no objection at the time of such occurrence. Witnesses were then sworn and the rule invoked. Several witnesses then testified for the state. Then the following transpired just prior to a noon recess during which the jurors went their separate ways. Following the noon recess the jury returned to the jury box and the following transpired: Several recesses (during which the jurors were allowed to separate) were declared by the court in the course of the trial. However, before each recess, the jurors were admonished to follow instructions already given. It is conceded that during the noon recess for lunch, the jurors were permitted to disperse and go their separate ways without any supervision except they had been instructed as set forth hereinabove. Following the noon recess, appellant moved for a mistrial because of the separation and dispersal of the jurors. There was no charge or proof offered that any juror was guilty of any misconduct, impropriety, or that any juror received any improper communication or influence from any outside source. The sole question before this Court is: Does Mere Dispersal and Separation of Jurors as is Shown by the Record Before Us Constitute Reversible Error? No other assignment of error is before us. The principles of law applicable here were enunciated by this Court, speaking through Patterson, J., in the case of Rogers v. State, 266 So. 2d 10 (Miss. 1972). There we affirmed a conviction where, as in the instant case (before the jury was permitted to separate), jurors were instructed by the Court not to discuss the case with anyone or permit themselves to be influenced by any outside source. Obviously, if this were a capital case, dispersal and separation of jurors would be reversible error even if permitted with the consent of the defendant. Wilson v. State, 248 So. 2d 802 (Miss. 1971). The case before us is not a capital case. As we held in the case of Nicholson v. State, 254 So. 2d 881 (Miss. 1971), there is a presumption that jurors follow the instructions of the court relative to their conduct during the course of a trial. We further held in Nicholson, supra, that in the absence of any evidence to the contrary we could not say that a defendant in a case less than capital was prejudiced by separation of the jury. Indeed, in the present case there is not even a suggestion that any juror failed to follow the instructions of the court. When the appellant here heard the trial judge announce that jurors would be permitted to separate during the noon hour, no objection was made until court reconvened after the noon recess. Then appellant objected and moved for a mistrial, which motion was overruled. We find no error in the ruling of the learned circuit judge. Following the rationale of our decisions in Rogers, supra, and Nicholson, supra, we now hold that separation of jurors, under proper instructions by the court in a criminal case less than capital, is not error. Affirmed. GILLESPIE, C.J., and INZER, SUGG and WALKER, JJ., concur.