Gaskin v. State
| Docket Number: | 2001-KA-01153-COA Linked Case(s): 2001-CT-01153-SCT ; 2001-CT-01153-SCT ; 2001-CT-01153-SCT ; 2001-KA-01153-COA ; 2001-CT-01153-SCT ; 2001-CT-01153-SCT |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 03-11-2003 Opinion Author: King, P.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Armed robbery - Double jeopardy - Peremptory challenges - Ineffective assistance of counsel Judge(s) Concurring: McMillin, C.J., Southwick, P.J., Bridges, Thomas, Lee, Irving, Myers, and Chandler, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Griffis, J. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 05-31-2001 Appealed from: Jackson County Circuit Court Judge: Kathy King Jackson Disposition: ARMED ROBBERY: SENTENCED TO SERVE A PERIOD OF TWENTY-FIVE YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF MDOC District Attorney: Keith Miller Case Number: 00-10,680(2) |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | William Lewis Gaskin |
ROSS PARKER SIMONS |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: BILLY L. GORE |
|
|
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 - Double jeopardy - Peremptory challenges - Ineffective assistance of counsel |
| Summary of the Facts: | William Gaskin was convicted of armed robbery. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Double jeopardy Gaskin argues that the second trial commenced on the same indictment, following a mistrial, violated his right to be free from multiple prosecutions for the same offense. The protection against double jeopardy does not attach in a criminal proceeding until after the jury is selected and sworn to try the case. Although the order entered following the mistrial stated that the jury had been sworn, a thorough review of the transcript clearly reveals that the twelve jurors and one alternate, although finally selected, called individually by name, and seated in open court, were never administered the official oath. Therefore, there can be no double jeopardy since the jury had not been sworn. Issue 2: Peremptory challenges Gaskin argues that the court erred in accepting the State’s reasons for striking jurors. The trial judge sits as finder of fact in the resolution of Batson challenges. The reasons included that one juror was an employee of the Public Defender's Office, the hostile demeanor of one juror, that the husband of one works for a bonding company which has close contact with defense attorneys and criminal defendants, and that one was an unemployed college graduate and the District Attorney's Office was currently prosecuting twelve defendants with her same last name. The findings of the trial court are not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence. Issue 3: Ineffective assistance of counsel Gaskin argues that his counsel's failure to recognize the alleged double jeopardy violation constituted ineffective assistance of counsel. Because there was no double jeopardy violation, the attorney’s failure to object to Gaskin's second trial on the basis of double jeopardy was not a deficiency in his performance. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
