Pipkins v. State
Docket Number: | 2001-KA-01622-COA Linked Case(s): 2001-CT-01622-SCT ; 2001-KA-01622-COA |
|
Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 01-06-2004 Opinion Author: McMillin, C.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Possession of controlled substance - Sufficiency of evidence - Other bad acts - Disparate sentences 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: 07-27-2001 Appealed from: George County Circuit Court Judge: Kathy King Jackson Disposition: COUNT I, POSSESSION OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE AND SENTENCED TO TEN YEARS; COUNT II, POSSESSION OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE AND SENTENCED TO TWENTY-FIVE YEARS TO RUN CONCURRENTLY WITH SENTENCE IN COUNT I, ORDERED TO PAY FINE OF $10,000 District Attorney: Keith Miller Case Number: 2000-10,080(2) |
Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
Appellant: | Edwin Eugene Pipkins |
ROSS PARKER SIMONS |
||
Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: CHARLES W. MARIS |
|
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: | Possession of controlled substance - Sufficiency of evidence - Other bad acts - Disparate sentences |
Summary of the Facts: | Edwin Pipkins was convicted of possession of a controlled substance and possession of precursor chemicals with the intent to manufacture a controlled substance. He appeals. |
Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Sufficiency of evidence Pipkins argues that the evidence was insufficient to support a guilty verdict. A presumption of constructive possession arises against the owner of premises upon which contraband is found. Although there was no evidence showing that Pipkins was in actual possession of the drug-related materials, they were discovered on the premises of a residential property shown by the proof to have been occupied by Pipkins as his principal domicile. Pipkins’ contention that he had voluntarily abandoned the property as his principal residence a few days before the discovery of the contraband is not so compelling as to require a determination that the State’s constructive possession case failed as a matter of law. Issue 2: Other bad acts Pipkins argues that an inquiry into whether Pipkins had telephoned his co-defendant the night before she was scheduled to testify and attempted to intimidate or otherwise improperly influence her testimony was a violation of the prohibition against evidence of other crimes or bad acts. Pipkins denied any such behavior. A question posed by an attorney participating in the trial is not evidence. In addition, this questioning, followed by Pipkins’s firm denials of any improper activity, was not so highly inflammatory and prejudicial to the defense as to affect the fundamental fairness of the trial. Issue 3: Disparate sentences Pipkins’s co-indictee pled guilty and was sentenced to one year under house arrest. Pipkins was sentenced to twenty-five years. He argues that the disparity in the sentences demonstrates that he was being punished for refusing to plead guilty. The court found that the evidence tended to indicate that Pipkins was principally responsible for the operation and that his co-indictee had cooperated with law enforcement officials on the day of her arrest and had since voluntarily completed a drug rehabilitation program. Given this evidence, the court was not unduly harsh in sentencing Pipkins based on his refusal to enter a plea of guilty. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court