Mayo v. State
| Docket Number: | 2002-KA-01927-COA Linked Case(s): 2002-CT-01927-SCT ; 2002-KA-01927-COA |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 05-11-2004 Opinion Author: Southwick, P.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Robbery - Extraneous matters - Misidentifying crime - Leading questions - Jury instructions - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Sufficiency of evidence Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Bridges, P.J., Thomas, Lee, Irving, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-24-2002 Appealed from: Lauderdale County Circuit Court Judge: Larry Eugene Roberts Disposition: GUILTY OF ROBBERY AND SENTENCED TO TEN YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MDOC District Attorney: Bilbo Mitchell Case Number: 679-01 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | James R. Mayo a/k/a James Ricky Mayo |
JAMES A. WILLIAMS |
||
| 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: | Robbery - Extraneous matters - Misidentifying crime - Leading questions - Jury instructions - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Sufficiency of evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | James Mayo was convicted of robbery and was sentenced to ten years. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Extraneous matters Mayo argues that statements made by the prosecutor and the investigating officer improperly revealed that he had a criminal record. This issue was not raised at trial and is therefore waived on appeal. Mayo also argues that the admission of a statement that he made to an investigating officer that he used the money to buy crack cocaine was reversible error. Because this statement was admissible as proof of motive, there is no error. Issue 2: Misidentifying crime Mayo argues that two detectives should not have been allowed to identify the crime to which they were responding. The officers were merely recounting what caused them to go to the Morgan residence. This explanation of events did not prejudice the defense. Issue 3: Leading questions The State's direct examination of one of the victims, who was eighty-two years old at the time of trial, included several leading questions. The State is given latitude in the use of leading questions during direct examination of an elderly witness. Issue 4: Jury instructions Mayo argues that two jury instructions were conflicting. However, there were no objections to the instructions. The absence of trial-level objections means that these issues were not preserved for appellate review. Issue 5: Ineffective assistance of counsel Mayo argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because of inadequate jury instructions; failure to prove that Mayo owned a car; failure to object to leading questions; agreeing with facts as presented by the State in opening statement; and failure to file motion for speedy trial. There is nothing in Mayo’s allegations to suggest meaningful deficiencies by the attorney. With regard to the right to speedy trial, Mayo’s right was not violated. Issue 6: Sufficiency of evidence Since there was evidence presented on every element of the crime, it was reasonable for the jury, upon the evidence at trial, to conclude that Mayo robbed the victim. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
