Conner v. State


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2002-KA-00439-COA

Court of Appeals: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 05-04-2004
Opinion Author: Irving, J.
Holding: Affirmed

Additional Case Information: Topic: Robbery by use of a deadly weapon - Continuance - Suppression of confessions - Sufficiency of evidence
Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Bridges and Southwick, P.JJ., Thomas, Lee, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ.
Procedural History: Jury Trial
Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 11-01-2001
Appealed from: Clarke County Circuit Court
Judge: Larry Eugene Roberts
Disposition: CONVICTION OF ROBBERY BY USE OF A DEADLY WEAPON - SENTENCED TO SERVE A TERM OF 15 YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF MDOC
District Attorney: Bilbo Mitchell
Case Number: 2001-35

  Party Name: Attorney Name:  
Appellant: Marcus D. Conner




STANFORD YOUNG



 

Appellee: State of Mississippi OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: CHARLES W. MARIS  

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 by use of a deadly weapon - Continuance - Suppression of confessions - Sufficiency of evidence

Summary of the Facts: Marcus Conner was convicted of robbery by use of a deadly weapon and sentenced to fifteen years. He appeals.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: Issue 1: Continuance Conner argues that the court erred when it failed to grant his request for a continuance to allow his new counsel time to prepare his case. Denial of a continuance is not reversible error unless manifest injustice is evident. Here, there is no manifest injustice. Connor unequivocally stated that he wanted to proceed with Young as his attorney, irrespective of the possibility that Young may not have been fully prepared to represent him. Moreover, Connor does not offer any insight as to how his defense would have been handled differently had the continuance been granted. Issue 2: Suppression of confessions Conner argues that the court committed reversible error in refusing to conduct a pretrial hearing on his motion to suppress the four statements that he gave to authorities. The refusal of the judge to hold a pre-trial hearing on the admissibility of the statements did not, in any way, prevent him from objecting to the admission of the statements when they were offered. In addition, the law enforcement officials, who took the statements from Conner, testified and attested to the fact that he freely and voluntarily gave the statements after being advised of his Miranda rights and after voluntarily executing a waiver of rights form. Issue 3: Sufficiency of evidence Although Conner challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, he fails to make any analysis of the evidence to show how or in what respects it was insufficient to sustain his conviction. The record contains sufficient evidence to uphold the jury's verdict.


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