Sanderson v. State


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2003-KA-00539-COA
Linked Case(s): 2003-CT-00539-SCT

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

Additional Case Information: Topic: Sexual battery & Statutory rape - Weight of evidence - Hearsay - M.R.E. 803(25)
Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Thomas, Lee, Irving, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ.
Concurs in Result Only: Southwick, P.J.
Procedural History: Jury Trial
Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 02-13-2003
Appealed from: Alcorn County Circuit Court
Judge: Thomas J. Gardner
Disposition: COUNT I, SEXUAL BATTERY: SENTENCED TO LIFE; COUNT II, STATUTORY RAPE: SENTENCED TO 20 YEARS ALL IN THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS TO RUN CONSECUTIVELY WITH COUNT I IN THIS CAUSE NUMBER. DEFENDANT TO REGISTER AS A SEX OFFENDER IF EVER RELEASED.
District Attorney: John Richard Young
Case Number: CR01-336

  Party Name: Attorney Name:  
Appellant: John W. Sanderson, Jr.




JOHN R. WHITE



 

Appellee: State of Mississippi OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: DEIRDRE MCCRORY  

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: Sexual battery & Statutory rape - Weight of evidence - Hearsay - M.R.E. 803(25)

Summary of the Facts: John Sanderson, Jr. was convicted of one count of sexual battery and one count of statutory rape. He was sentenced to a term of life and twenty years, respectively. He appeals.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: Issue 1: Weight of evidence Sanderson argues that the jury's verdict was against the overwhelming weight of the evidence. The jury heard the witnesses and the evidence and arguments presented by both the State and the defense, and the question of Sanderson's guilt was for the jury to decide. The verdict was not so contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence that, to allow it to stand, would have been to promote an unconscionable injustice. Issue 2: Hearsay Sanderson argues that the court erred in admitting hearsay statements pursuant to M.R.E. 803(25) since admitted statements were not spontaneous. Factors the court should consider under M.R.E. 803(25) include whether there is an apparent motive on declarant's part to lie; the general character of the declarant; whether more than one person heard the statements; whether the statements were made spontaneously; the timing of the declarations; the relationship between the declarant and the witness; the possibility of the declarant's faulty recollection is remote; certainty that the statements were made; the credibility of the person testifying about the statements; the age or maturity of the declarant; whether suggestive techniques were used in eliciting the statement; and whether the declarant's age, knowledge, and experience make it unlikely that the declarant fabricated. Here, the judge made extensive findings as to the factors necessary to ascertain the veracity of the declarant's testimony. The judge found that there was no motive to lie, that the witnesses's character was not in dispute, that the statements were spontaneous and not coerced, and that the witnesses's testimony was credible. Therefore, the judge did not abuse his discretion in allowing the testimony.


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