Bufkin v. State
| Docket Number: | 2002-KA-02111-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 03-09-2004 Opinion Author: McMillin, C.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Felony shoplifting - Prior convictions - Section 97-23-93(8) Judge(s) Concurring: King and Southwick, P.JJ., Bridges, Thomas, Lee, Irving, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 11-14-2002 Appealed from: Neshoba County Circuit Court Judge: Marcus D. Gordon Disposition: FELONY SHOPLIFTING - THIRD OR SUBSEQUENT OFFENSE: SENTENCED TO SERVE A TERM OF FOUR YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS District Attorney: Ken Turner Case Number: 02-CR-088-NG-G |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Ruby Bufkin a/k/a Ruby J. Moncreaise |
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: | Felony shoplifting - Prior convictions - Section 97-23-93(8) |
| Summary of the Facts: | Ruby Bufkin was convicted of felony shoplifting. She appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | In order to constitute felony shoplifting under section 97-23-93(8), the State must show that the conviction was a third or subsequent shoplifting conviction occurring within seven years of the shoplifting offense in question. Bufkin argues that it is only appropriate to use the date of conviction as to the last occurrence in defining the end of the seven-year period. The Mississippi Legislature, in defining the applicable seven-year period during which prior occurrences of shoplifting would affect the severity of the defendant’s punishment, elected to use different language to set the beginning date of the period from that used to establish the end date. As to the commencement of the period, the legislature used the term “conviction.” The prior conviction relevant to this issue occurred on May 31, 1995. As to the date marking the end of the seven-year period, the legislature in essence defined it as the date of the shoplifting offense in question. Whether further events are necessary to establish with the requisite certainty that an offense has, in fact, occurred, the playing out of those events does not serve to move the date of the offense from the time of the event to the time that it is finally adjudicated that the events actually occurred. For purposes of the computations required under section 97-23-93(8) relating to prior shoplifting convictions, the date of the offense is the date of the occurrence giving rise to the charge rather than the date that it is finally adjudicated that the criminal activity actually occurred. Bufkin also argues that the proper way to handle the matter of prior convictions was to bifurcate the trial with the trial court making the necessary determinations regarding the prior convictions as a part of the sentencing phase of the trial. Not only did Bufkin fail to object on this ground at trial, but the prior convictions are elements of the crime that must be determined by the finder of fact beyond reasonable doubt as a part of the prosecution’s case in chief. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
