Plair v. State
| Docket Number: | 2003-KA-00474-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 03-09-2004 Opinion Author: McMillin, C.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Aggravated assault - Peremptory challenges - Section 13-5-69 - Credibility 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: 02-20-2003 Appealed from: Tate County Circuit Court Judge: Ann H. Lamar Disposition: CONVICTED OF AGGRAVATED ASSAULT AND SENTENCED TO SERVE A TERM OF TWELVE YEARS IN THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS District Attorney: John W. Champion Case Number: CR2002-68-L-T |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Allen Earl Plair |
DAVID L. WALKER |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: W. GLENN WATTS |
|
|
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: | Aggravated assault - Peremptory challenges - Section 13-5-69 - Credibility |
| Summary of the Facts: | Allen Plair was convicted of aggravated assault. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Peremptory challenges Plair argues that the court erred in denying his request to disallow the State’s use of peremptory challenges during jury selection. Peremptory strikes are specifically authorized under authority of section 13-5-69. Plair makes no contention that any strikes actually exercised by the prosecution violated any of the provisions of Batson. Therefore, there is no basis to find error. Issue 2: Credibility Plair argues that the court erred in overruling his objection to an inquiry by the prosecutor, made during the cross-examination of Plair, that was intended to call into question his credibility, since the jury is the sole finder of fact in a criminal trial. The proper subject of inquiry of a witness relates to information having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence. Here, the prosecutor’s question to Plair had no possibility of eliciting information that would have been helpful to the jury in determining any fact of consequence in deciding Plair’s culpability. However, Plair has not alleged any particular basis for concluding that this inquiry by the prosecutor resulted in any prejudice or harm to the defense and therefore, the error is harmless. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
