Lott v. State
| Docket Number: | 2001-KA-00945-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 04-29-2003 Opinion Author: Lee, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Armed robbery - Admission of confession - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Sufficiency of evidence 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: 06-14-2001 Appealed from: Scott County Circuit Court Judge: Marcus D. Gordon Disposition: CONVICTED ON THREE COUNTS OF ARMED ROBBERY AND SENTENCED TO SERVE TWENTY-FIVE YEARS FOR COUNT I, TEN YEARS FOR COUNT II, TO RUN CONCURRENTLY TO THE SENTENCE IN COUNT I, AND TEN YEARS FOR COUNT III TO RUN CONSECUTIVELY TO THE SENTENCES IN COUNTS I AND II, ALL IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS. District Attorney: Ken Turner Case Number: 01-CR-0034-SC G |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Troy Lee Lott, Jr. |
PRO SE
EDMUND J. PHILLIPS |
||
| 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: | Armed robbery - Admission of confession - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Sufficiency of evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Troy Lott, Jr., was convicted on three counts of armed robbery and was sentenced to serve twenty-five years for Count I, ten years for Count II, to run concurrently to the sentence in Count I, and ten years for Count III to run consecutively to the sentences in Counts I and II. Lott appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Confession Lott argues that his confession was involuntary and the court erred in allowing it to be admitted. The State meets its burden of proving all facts prerequisite to admissibility beyond a reasonable doubt by the testimony of an officer, or other person having knowledge of the facts, that the confession was voluntarily made without any threats, coercion, or offer of reward. Here, the two interrogating officers present at the time Lott signed the confession both testified that they did not threaten or coerce Lott into confessing. Therefore, the confession was properly admitted. Issue 2: Ineffective assistance of counsel Lott argues that his counsel was deficient in failing to call any defense witnesses, in failing to move for a continuance to allow Lott to choose other counsel, in failing to introduce favorable evidence, in failing to present mitigating evidence during sentencing, and since he was innocent yet convicted, was deficient since the trial resulted in a conviction. To prove his claim, he must show his attorney’s conduct was deficient and prejudicial. A review of the record reveals no deficiency in the performance of his attorney, who zealously cross-examined the witnesses and competently defended Lott. Issue 3:Sufficiency of evidence Lott argues that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict. Two of the robbery victims testified and both identified Lott as one of the robbers; Lott's former girlfriend testified that Lott told her beforehand of his plans to commit the robbery and afterwards showed her some of the loot taken in the robbery; an officer testified concerning taking Lott's confession; and Lott's written confession was entered into evidence. This was sufficient evidence to support the verdict. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
