Jackson v. State
| Docket Number: | 2001-KA-01993-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 03-18-2003 Opinion Author: Thomas, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Statutory rape - Rebuttal testimony Judge(s) Concurring: McMillin, C.J., King and Southwick, P.JJ., Bridges, Lee, Irving, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 12-19-2001 Appealed from: DeSoto County Circuit Court Judge: George B. Ready Disposition: STATUTORY RAPE, SENTENCED TO FORTY YEARS WITH THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS. District Attorney: John W. Champion Case Number: CR 2001-515RD |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Tony Earl Jackson |
JOHN KEITH PERRY |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: JEFFREY A. KLINGFUSS |
|
|
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: | Statutory rape - Rebuttal testimony |
| Summary of the Facts: | Tony Jackson was convicted of statutory rape and sentenced to forty years. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Jackson argues that the court erred in denying his motion to prevent the State's witness from giving cumulative testimony in rebuttal on matters previously addressed by the same witness. Where there is doubt as to whether evidence is properly rebuttal evidence, the court should resolve the doubt in favor of reception in rebuttal if its reception will not consume so much additional time as to give an undue weight in practical probative force to the evidence, the opposite party would be substantially as well prepared to meet it by surrebuttal as if the testimony had been offered in chief, and the opposite party upon request is given the opportunity to reply by surrebuttal. Because rebuttal was precise and did not bring undo attention to the facts or to repeating the State's case in chief, the court did not abuse its discretion in denying Jackson's motion. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
