McCoy v. State
| Docket Number: | 2002-KA-01461-COA Linked Case(s): 2002-CT-01461-SCT ; 2002-KA-01461-COA |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 01-27-2004 Opinion Author: Lee, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Sexual battery - Right to remain silent - Communication by judge - Closing argument - Excited utterances - M.R.E. 803(2) - Sufficiency of evidence - Jury instruction - Ineffective assistance of counsel Judge(s) Concurring: McMillin, C.J., King and Southwick, P.JJ., Bridges, Thomas, Irving, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 08-01-2002 Appealed from: Lauderdale County Circuit Court Judge: Larry Eugene Roberts Disposition: CONVICTED OF SEXUAL BATTERY AND SENTENCED TO SERVE THIRTY YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS. THIS SENTENCE SHALL NOT BE REDUCED OR SUSPENDED AND HE SHALL NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR PROBATION, PAROLE. District Attorney: Bilbo Mitchell Case Number: 842-00 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Leon McCoy |
JAMES A. WILLIAMS |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: SCOTT STUART |
|
|
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 - Right to remain silent - Communication by judge - Closing argument - Excited utterances - M.R.E. 803(2) - Sufficiency of evidence - Jury instruction - Ineffective assistance of counsel |
| Summary of the Facts: | Leon McCoy was convicted of sexual battery of a female minor and sentenced to thirty years. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Right to remain silent McCoy argues that the State on cross-examination improperly asked him if he invoked his constitutional right not to incriminate himself after being arrested. While a prosecutor's repeated reference to a defendant's post-arrest silence, after he received warnings that he need not answer questions, violates due process, there can be no infringement upon the right to remain silent when the defendant does not exercise his right to remain silent when questioned at the time of the arrest. McCoy cannot claim his right to silence was infringed when he admitted to not remaining silent. Issue 2: Communication by judge McCoy argues that the judge believed the victim's testimony and communicated this fact to the jury in his rulings. The judge made statements about the "truth of the matter" in ruling on various objections. These were not remarks about the credibility of the witnesses but were findings in response to hearsay objections. Issue 3: Closing argument McCoy argues that the State should not have been allowed to state in its closing argument that it was the grand jury that decided what to charge him with, not the victim. In determining whether a prosecutor's argument necessitates reversal, the test is whether the natural and probable effect of the prosecuting attorney's improper argument created unjust prejudice against the accused resulting in a decision influenced by prejudice. Because McCoy tried to infer in his argument that because he was not charged with rape, then the victim's version of the facts is untruthful, it became necessary for the State to clarify that the victim does not decide what charge to bring against the accused, rather the grand jury does. Issue 4: Excited utterances McCoy argues that the judge erroneously ruled that the victim's statements to her aunt were excited utterances and, therefore, an exception to the hearsay rule. M.R.E. 803(2) provides that a statement relating to a startling event or condition made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement caused by the event or condition is not excluded by the hearsay rule. Immediately after being kicked out of McCoy's car, the victim ran to her aunt's apartment and told her what had happened. These statements were clearly within the excited utterance exception to the hearsay rule. Issue 5: Sufficiency of evidence McCoy argues that the verdict was against the overwhelming weight and sufficiency of the evidence. The unsupported word of the victim of a sex crime is sufficient to support a guilty verdict where the testimony is not discredited or contradicted by other credible evidence. The victim testified in detail as to what occurred once McCoy had abducted her, tied her up, and took her for a drive. Her testimony and conduct was consistent with someone who has been the victim of a sex crime, and a reasonable and fair-minded jury could have easily found McCoy guilty of sexual battery. Issue 6: Jury instruction McCoy argues that a jury instruction given by the court was flawed because using the connector "and/or" between the sexual acts did not require the jury to find that he both placed his finger in the victim's anus and licked her genitals. This issue is barred since McCoy failed to make a contemporaneous objection. Issue 7: Ineffective assistance of counsel McCoy argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel, because his counsel failed with regard to jury instructions, judge's comments, questioning the voluntariness of his statements, cross-examining the victim about the details of the sexual acts, and in declining to make an opening statement. In looking at the record, McCoy's counsel extensively cross-examined the victim and the officer and voiced objections when appropriate. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
