Seals v. State
| Docket Number: | 2002-KA-01195-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 03-30-2004 Opinion Author: Chandler, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Sale of cocaine - Leading questions - Authentication of videotape - M.R.E. 901(b)(1) - Best evidence rule Judge(s) Concurring: McMillin, C.J., King and Southwick, P.JJ., Bridges, Thomas, Lee, Irving, Myers and Griffis, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 07-18-2002 Appealed from: Neshoba County Circuit Court Judge: Vernon Cotten Disposition: SALE OF COCAINE: SENTENCED TO 25 YEARS IN THE MDOC District Attorney: Ken Turner Case Number: 02-CR-0009-NS C |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Henry Seals |
EDMUND J. PHILLIPS |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: JEAN SMITH VAUGHAN |
|
|
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: | Sale of cocaine - Leading questions - Authentication of videotape - M.R.E. 901(b)(1) - Best evidence rule |
| Summary of the Facts: | Henry Seals was convicted on two counts of selling cocaine. He was sentenced to twenty-five years on each count. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Leading questions Seals argues that the court erred by allowing the prosecutor to ask leading questions. To justify a reversal because of the allowance of a leading question, a party must show that there was a manifest abuse of discretion and that the question influenced the answer resulting in injury. In this case, the effect of leading questions did no harm to the defendant. The purpose and effect of the leading questions were to describe what was clearly being shown on the videotape. Issue 2: Videotape Seals argues that the copy of the videotape was not properly authenticated and was not the best evidence. M.R.E. 901(b)(1) provides that authentication can be accomplished by testimony from someone familiar with and with knowledge of the contents of the document or recording. The State satisfied this rule when it offered the testimony of the confidential informant who was familiar with the particulars of the drug transaction and testified sufficiently to the accuracy of the recording. With regard to the best evidence rule, the State offered a logical reason for presenting a duplicate VHS copy of the videotape and Seals did not suffer any undue prejudice by admission of the copy. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
