Jack v. State
| Docket Number: | 2002-KA-01531-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 07-20-2004 Opinion Author: Lee, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Armed robbery - Recusal of judge - Suppression of evidence - Investigative stop - Probable cause Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Bridges and Southwick, P.JJ., Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ. Concurs in Result Only: Irving, J. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-05-2002 Appealed from: Lowndes County Circuit Court Judge: Lee J. Howard Disposition: GUILTY OF ARMED ROBBERY; SENTENCED TO TWENTY-FIVE YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS. District Attorney: Forrest Allgood Case Number: 2002-0090-CR1 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Carlos Jack |
GARY GOODWIN |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: W. GLENN WATTS |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Armed robbery - Recusal of judge - Suppression of evidence - Investigative stop - Probable cause |
| Summary of the Facts: | Carlos Jack was convicted of armed robbery of a bank. Because the jury was unable to agree on a sentence, the judge sentenced Jack to twenty-five years. Jack appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Recusal of judge Jack argues that the judge erred in refusing to recuse himself from the case, because the judge's wife is employed by a holding company which operates a number of banks throughout Mississippi and Alabama. Recusal is required when the evidence produces a reasonable doubt as to the judge's impartiality. The judge’s wife was not the victim of the robbery, was not affected by the robbery, was not involved in the robbery, and has no interest which would be affected by the outcome of this criminal prosecution. Therefore, the judge did not abuse his discretion in refusing to recuse himself. Issue 2: Suppression of evidence Jack argues that the court erred in denying his motion to suppress certain evidence that was obtained after he and the other suspect fled from the police and were subsequently stopped by a roadblock, because the stop lacked probable cause. For an officer to have legal authority for an investigative stop, he need only have a reasonable suspicion that the accused is involved in a felony. Here, the deputy knew that an armed robbery had just occurred, that the suspects were fleeing in an older model brown car, and that the suspects were heavy-set black males. Therefore, the deputy had information sufficient to constitute reasonable suspicion that the men in the car had been involved in the bank robbery. Once Jack refused to yield to the lights and siren and fled, the deputy also obtained probable cause. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
