Opinion
No. 40209.
November 12, 1956.
1. Appeal — revocation of suspension of jail sentence — appeal did not lie.
Appeal did not lie from an order revoking suspensions of jail sentences during good behavior, and directing that defendant be placed in jail to serve the sentences.
Headnote as approved by Roberds, P.J.
APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Neshoba County; W.E. McINTYRE, Judge.
W.T. Weir, Philadelphia, for appellant.
I. The evidence as a whole in this case fails to show a criminal intent.
J.R. Griffin, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.
I. The testimony was sufficient to warrant the Court in revoking the suspensions, inasmuch as the evidence did not need to establish a violation beyond a reasonable doubt, but only such as would convince the Court that the conditions of the suspensions had been violated. McLemore v. State, 170 Miss. 641, 155 So. 415.
II. The sufficiency or insufficiency of the evidence has no place in the determination of this cause, inasmuch as an appeal from an order revoking a sentence does not lie. Kittrell v. State, 201 Miss. 515, 29 So.2d 313; Mason v. Cochran, Sheriff, 209 Miss. 163, 46 So.2d 106.
Blount, the appellant, plead guilty in the Circuit Court of Neshoba County, Mississippi, to two separate charges of trespass and one charge of assault and battery. In each case, he was sentenced to pay a fine and serve a term in jail. The jail sentences were suspended during good behavior.
Later, upon due notice to Blount and a full hearing, and upon ample evidence, it was found and adjudicated by said circuit court that Blount, without any justification whatever, using a rifle and a pistol, had shot at one John L. Horn four times, three of the bullets hitting Horn. The trial judge revoked the former suspensions of the jail sentences and ordered that Blount be placed in jail to serve said sentences. From that action Blount attempts to appeal to this Court.
(Hn 1) We have held that such an appeal does not lie. Kittrell v. State, 201 Miss. 515, 29 So.2d 313; Mason v. Cochran, Sheriff, 209 Miss. 163, 46 So.2d 106.
However, even though appellant, instead of attempting to appeal, had invoked habeas corpus, still, under the facts in this record, he was not entitled to any relief.
The appeal is dismissed.
Lee, Arrington, Ethridge and Gillespie, JJ., concur.