Holbrook v. State
| Docket Number: | 2002-KA-01722-COA Linked Case(s): 2002-CT-01722-COA ; 2002-CT-01722-COA |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 01-13-2004 Opinion Author: Southwick, P.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Attempted burglary, Arson & Murder - Suppression of evidence - Probable cause - Venue - Habitual offender status Judge(s) Concurring: McMillin, C.J., Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ. Dissenting Author : Thomas, J. Dissent Joined By : King, P.J., Bridges, Lee and Irving, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 10-10-2002 Appealed from: Panola County Circuit Court Judge: Andrew C. Baker Disposition: ATTEMPTED BURGLARY, ARSON, MURDER, AS AN HABITUAL OFFENDER, SENTENCED TO LIFE IMPRISONMENT WITHOUT PAROLE. District Attorney: John W. Champion Case Number: CR-2002-37-BP2 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Edward Fred Holbrook, Jr., a/k/a Bubba |
DAVID CLAY VANDERBURG |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: JOHN R. HENRY |
|
|
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: | Attempted burglary, Arson & Murder - Suppression of evidence - Probable cause - Venue - Habitual offender status |
| Summary of the Facts: | Edward Holbrook, Jr. was convicted of attempting a burglary, arson, and a murder. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Suppression of evidence Holbrook argues that the court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence seized by law enforcement officers, because the actual search warrants contained numerous mistakes and there was no probable cause for issuance of the search warrants. Some of the blanks on the form warrant were left blank. These errors in the search warrants are clerical and do not rise to the level necessary to invalidate them. Probable cause for issuance of a search warrant is present when facts and circumstance within the officer's knowledge, or of which he had reasonable trustworthy information, are sufficient to justify a man of average caution in the belief that a crime has been committed and that a particular individual committed it. With regard to the search of the Holbrook home concerning conviction records from Tennessee, Holbrookâs ex-wife informed officers that she had seen these papers at her home during her marriage. This was probable cause for issuance of the warrant. Issue 2: Venue Holbrook resided in and was arrested in Tate County. However, the site of the fires he planned to start and the store at which the robbery was to occur were in Panola County. While venue would have been proper in Tate County, the State brought the case in Panola County. The crime in this case, arson, has as a necessary element that there be an intended effect of an arson in a specific location. The locus of the effect of this crime therefore is proper for venue. The arson was described in two counts of the indictment as the intent to commit arson of the dwellings of two specifically named persons in Panola County. The intent to commit the arson of those specific structures was an integral part of the crime charged. When all that is committed are the overt acts of an attempt, acts that might independently be innocent of criminal content, an indispensable component of the attempt is that it was directed towards committing a specific crime that was blocked before completion. The effect in Panola County of this attempted arson is the sine qua non of the criminal nature of the acts that Holbrook committed, making the location of the effect integral to the crime and a proper venue for charges. The acts of the crime up until it was thwarted in the attempt stage occurred in Tate County. The effects and perhaps the means of the crime had the arson been performed would have been in Panola County. There is nothing conceptually outrageous or bizarre in bringing charges in Panola County for attempting to burn a building in Panola County. For inchoate crimes, the identifiable effects are in the county in which the crime would have been committed. When the locus of the intended crime is not in the county in which the overt acts of the attempt are committed, the county of the intended crime still has an acutely focused association with the attempt. Issue 3: Habitual offender status Holbrook argues that the State failed to prove that he was an habitual offender. Information concerning Holbrook's prior record established that Holbrook had been convicted of two or more felonies in Tennessee on charges separately brought and arising out of separate incidents at different times, that he was sentenced to and served separate terms of one year or more in Tennessee's penal institutions and that one of his prior convictions was a crime of violence, aggravated assault. Therefore, Holbrook meets the definition of habitual offender. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
