Pryor v. State

15 Citing cases

  1. Murrell v. State

    655 So. 2d 881 (Miss. 1995)   Cited 37 times
    Holding that resisting arrest is lesser offense of assault on an officer

    Secondly, the jury had the right to infer that the officer did feel pain when Murrell was throwing him to the ground and choking him. This Court has held in Pryor v. State, 349 So.2d 1063 (Miss. 1977), that a jury, as fact finder, is entitled to consider not only facts testified to by witnesses but all inferences that may be reasonably and logically deduced from the facts in evidence. We held in Campbell v. State, 278 So.2d 420 (Miss. 1973), that all proof need not be direct and the jury may draw any reasonable inferences from all evidence in a case.

  2. Brown v. State

    534 So. 2d 1019 (Miss. 1988)   Cited 69 times
    Describing return as ministerial act and noting improper return does not invalidate search

    1980); Jones v. State, 367 So.2d 458 (Miss. 1979); Pyron v. State, 349 So.2d 1063 (Miss. 1977). This Court confines itself to objections made in the trial court.

  3. Burney v. State

    515 So. 2d 1154 (Miss. 1987)   Cited 51 times
    Holding that it is the duty of the appellant to insure that the record contains sufficient evidence to support his assignments of error on appeal

    It was up to the jury to decide this issue. In Pryor v. State, 349 So.2d 1063, 1064 (Miss. 1977), this Court stated: It is well established in Mississippi that a jury, as the finder of fact, is entitled to consider not only facts as testified to by witnesses, but all inferences that may be reasonably and logically deduced from the facts and evidence.

  4. Sims v. State

    512 So. 2d 1256 (Miss. 1987)   Cited 11 times

    1980); Jones v. State, 367 So.2d 458 (Miss. 1979); Pryor v. State, 349 So.2d 1063 (Miss. 1977); Meyer v. State, 309 So.2d 161 (Miss. 1975).

  5. Suan v. State

    511 So. 2d 144 (Miss. 1987)   Cited 55 times
    In Suan, the defendant sought to show that a witness had been involved in criminal activity but had not been prosecuted.

    See, e.g., Miller v. State, 492 So.2d 978, 981 (Miss. 1986); Pryor v. State, 349 So.2d 1063, 1064 (Miss. 1977). IV.

  6. Robinson v. State

    508 So. 2d 1067 (Miss. 1987)   Cited 28 times

    This comment requires some examination. In Spots v. State, 427 So.2d 127 (Miss. 1983), citing Pryor v. State, 349 So.2d 1063 (Miss. 1977), this Court listed four factors which, at that time, were to be considered before reversal of a trial court's decision based on failure to produce discovery material. The fourth factor listed was . . "Whether . . . the introduction of the evidence was harmful to the defendant in the light of all the circumstances."

  7. Miller v. State

    492 So. 2d 978 (Miss. 1986)   Cited 13 times
    Interpreting same statute at issue in the instant case

    Gathright v. State, 380 So.2d 1276, 1278 (Miss. 1980); Pryor v. State, 349 So.2d 1063, 1064-65 (Miss. 1977). Moreover, the evidence was such that no one could rationally say that the verdict was contrary to its weight.

  8. Thomas v. State

    488 So. 2d 1343 (Miss. 1986)   Cited 5 times

    See also, Love v. State, 441 So.2d 1353, 1355 (Miss. 1983); Pryor v. State, 349 So.2d 1063, 1065 (Miss. 1977); Gentry v. State, 338 So.2d 1229, 1231 (Miss. 1976); Sisk v. State, 260 So.2d 485, 488 (Miss.

  9. Henry v. State

    484 So. 2d 1012 (Miss. 1986)   Cited 48 times
    In Henry we noted that Hill had "considerable training and fifteen (15) years of experience in the examination of questioned documents."

    " This comment requires some examination. In Spots v. State, 427 So.2d 127 (Miss. 1983), citing Pryor v. State, 349 So.2d 1063 (Miss. 1977), this Court listed four factors which, at that time, were to be considered before reversal of a trial court's decision based on failure to produce discovery material. The fourth factor listed was "Whether . . . the introduction of the evidence was harmful and prejudicial to the defendant in the light of all the circumstances."

  10. Spots v. State

    427 So. 2d 127 (Miss. 1983)   Cited 8 times

    The Criminal Rules of Circuit Court Practice were recently amended and approved on October 26, 1982. In addressing this question the Court has held that the failure to produce discovery material is not a per se ground for reversal. Pryor v. State, 349 So.2d 1063 (Miss. 1977). In Pryor, this Court listed four factors which should be considered before reversal of a trial court's decision.