Bates v. State


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2001-KA-00953-COA
Linked Case(s): 2001-CT-00953-SCT ; 2001-KA-00953-COA

Court of Appeals: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 05-11-2004
Opinion Author: Thomas, J.
Holding: Affirmed

Additional Case Information: Topic: Possession of cocaine - Right to speedy trial - Videotape
Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Bridges and Southwick, P.JJ., Lee, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ.
Dissenting Author : Irving, J.
Procedural History: Jury Trial
Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 09-29-2000
Appealed from: Hinds County Circuit Court
Judge: L. Breland Hilburn
Disposition: CONVICTED OF POSSESSION OF COCAINE AND SENTENCED TO TWENTY-FIVE YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS.
District Attorney: Edward J. Peters
Case Number: 99-261-CRH

  Party Name: Attorney Name:  
Appellant: Michael Bates




CHOKWE LUMUMBA



 

Appellee: State of Mississippi OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: JOHN R. HENRY  

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: Possession of cocaine - Right to speedy trial - Videotape

Summary of the Facts: Michael Bates was convicted of possession of cocaine and was sentenced to twenty-five years. He appeals.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: Issue 1: Right to speedy trial Bates argues that he was denied his constitutional right to a speedy trial. Factors to consider include length of delay, reason for delay, whether defendant asserted his right, and any resulting prejudice. The time between arrest and trial amounts to 654 days which is presumptively prejudicial. Generally, if a continuance is granted to a co-defendant for good cause, it operates as a good cause delay as to a jointly charged defendant. Here, most of the time can be attributed to continuances granted to Bates’ co-indictee. Bates did not move for severance, demand a speedy trial, object to the continuances granted, nor provide any evidence that the continuances were not granted for good cause. There is no evidence that Bates ever demanded trial. With regard to prejudice, the only evidence shown by Bates was his incarceration. Pre-trial incarceration is insufficient to establish prejudice. Balancing these factors, Bates was not denied his constitutional right to a speedy trial. Issue 2: Videotape Bates argues that the jurors may have seen portions of the videotape which were not admitted into evidence, i.e., the discovery of a small amount of cocaine in Bates' jacket pocket. Bates had the burden of proof to demonstrate that the jury had in fact watched portions of the video not admitted into evidence but offered no evidence to support his assertion. And even if the video had been viewed in its entirety, no prejudice would have occurred and any error would have been harmless since the small amount of cocaine was found on Bates incident to his arrest.


Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court