Lane v. State
| Docket Number: | 2001-KA-01820-COA Linked Case(s): 2001-KA-01820-COA |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 02-04-2003 Opinion Author: Thomas, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Shooting into a dwelling - Prior convictions - Expert testimony - M.R.E. 702 - Mistrial - Sufficiency of evidence Judge(s) Concurring: McMillin, C.J., King and Southwick, P.JJ., Bridges, 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: 06-29-2001 Appealed from: Madison County Circuit Court Judge: Samac Richardson Disposition: SHOOTING INTO A DWELLING: SENTENCED TO TEN YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS. District Attorney: Rick Mitchell Case Number: 2000-431 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Marshall Lane, Jr. |
JOHN R. MCNEAL JR. |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: W. GLENN WATTS |
|
|
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: | Shooting into a dwelling - Prior convictions - Expert testimony - M.R.E. 702 - Mistrial - Sufficiency of evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Marshall Lane, Jr. was convicted of shooting into a dwelling and was sentenced to ten years. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Prior convictions Lane argues that the court erred in informing Lane that the prosecution would be able to question him about any felony record during the last ten years if he chose to testify, because his ability to defend himself was hampered. Because Lane failed to proffer anything evidencing his testimony, the issue has not been preserved for appeal. In addition, the record includes no indications that Lane wanted to testify. Issue 2: Expert testimony Lane argues that the court erred in allowing a deputy to testify about shotgun wads he found inside the dwelling, because the deputy was not qualified as an expert under M.R.E. 702. The test to determine whether the opinion of a witness constitutes expert opinion testimony rather than lay opinion testimony is whether the witness possesses some experience or expertise beyond that of the average, randomly selected adult. The deputy testified about what he observed at the scene, including small plastic wads found within the house. He did not have to be an expert in the field of shotgun shell construction to recognize the wad or to testify that it was small and in his opinion came from a .410 gauge. Issue 3: Mistrial Lane argues that the court erred in refusing to declare a mistrial after a State's witness testified that Lane had attacked her earlier on the day that the shots were fired into her house, because the testimony violated the court's ruling on Lane's motion in limine and seriously prejudiced his defense. A defendant cannot complain of evidence that he himself introduces by virtue of his own questions. This witness was on cross-examination when the testimony of which Lane complains arose. Issue 4: Sufficiency of evidence Lane argues that there was insufficient evidence for the jury to convict him of firing into an occupied dwelling. The jury in this case heard evidence from eyewitnesses who placed Lane outside the house before and after the shots were fired. In addition, his alibi testimony was rebutted by several witnesses. This evidence was sufficient to support the verdict. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
