Everett v. State
| Docket Number: | 2001-KA-01356-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 01-21-2003 Opinion Author: Chandler, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Aggravated assault & possession of firearm by felon - Prior inconsistent statement - M.R.E. 613(b) - Excessive sentence Judge(s) Concurring: McMillin, C.J., King and Southwick, P.JJ., Bridges, Thomas, Lee, Irving and Myers, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Griffis, J. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 06-21-2001 Appealed from: Wayne County Circuit Court Judge: Larry Eugene Roberts Disposition: COUNT I - AGGRAVATED ASSAULT - TO SERVE 20 YEARS AS A HABITUAL OFFENDER; COUNT II - FELON IN POSSESSION OF A FIREARM - TO SERVE 3 YEARS AS A HABITUAL OFFENDER District Attorney: Bilbo Mitchell Case Number: 01-029-K |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Lois Everett, Jr. a/k/a Loyce Everett, Jr. a/k/a Loyce Everett |
LESLIE D. ROUSSELL |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: DEIRDRE MCCRORY |
|
|
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: | Aggravated assault & possession of firearm by felon - Prior inconsistent statement - M.R.E. 613(b) - Excessive sentence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Lois Everett was convicted of aggravated assault and possession of a firearm by a felon. He was sentenced to twenty-three years. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Admission of affidavit Everett argues that the court erred in refusing to allow the unsworn affidavit of one of the State’s witnesses into evidence, because there were two inconsistencies between the witness’s testimony and his affidavit. M.R.E. 613(b) allows impeachment of witnesses with their prior inconsistent statements by extrinsic evidence, i.e., putting on other witnesses who will introduce facts discrediting the previous witness's testimony. Before a party may impeach a witness under Rule 613(b), there must be an actual contradiction in fact between the testimony and the prior statement. Here, Everett fails to show that the witness’s prior statement is inconsistent with his trial testimony. The prior statement of the witness does not have any reasonable tendency to discredit his testimony. In addition, some foundation must be laid before impeachment testimony will be permitted, and the defense counsel in this case failed to lay such a predicate when the witness was on the stand. Issue 2: Excessive sentence Everett argues that the sentence of twenty-three years was excessive. The court on appeal will not review a sentence unless it is considered constitutionally disproportionate or not within the statutory limits. In this case, the judge’s sentencing order was constitutional and within the statutory limits. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
