Jones v. State
Docket Number: | 2005-KA-02135-COA Linked Case(s): 2005-KA-02135-COA ; 2005-CT-02135-SCT |
|
Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 02-20-2007 Opinion Author: CARLTON, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Sale of cocaine - Sufficiency of evidence - Ineffective assistance of counsel Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C.J., LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., CHANDLER, GRIFFIS, BARNES, ISHEE AND ROBERTS, JJ. Concurs in Result Only: IRVING, J. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 11-08-2005 Appealed from: Jones County Circuit Court Judge: Billy Joe Landrum Disposition: CONVICTED OF SALE OF COCAINE AND SENTENCED TO THIRTY YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS WITH TWENTY YEARS TO SERVE AND TEN YEARS SUSPENDED AFTER COMPLETION OF THE COMMUNITY SERVICE PROGRAM, AND A $1,000 FINE. District Attorney: ANTHONY J. BUCKLEY Case Number: 2004-101-KR2 |
Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
Appellant: | ALBERT JONES |
MICHAEL DUANE MITCHELL
JEANNENE PACIFIC |
||
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: | Sale of cocaine - Sufficiency of evidence - Ineffective assistance of counsel |
Summary of the Facts: | Albert Jones was convicted for the crime of sale of cocaine. He appeals. |
Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Sufficiency of evidence Jones argues that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction because the only eyewitness was of questionable character and was biased against Jones. The evidence presented against Jones at trial included direct testimony and video evidence of the sale and transfer of a substance later confirmed to be cocaine. Both the police officer and the eyewitness identified the seller of cocaine on the video as Jones. Although the eyewitness was not the most reliable or credible witness, the role of the jury is to be the sole judges of the credibility of the witnesses. Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the State, there is sufficient evidence to support the jury’s decision to convict Jones. Issue 2: Ineffective assistance of counsel Jones argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel, because his attorney allowed the prosecutor to testify during jury voir dire about narcotics investigations and use of confidential informants, failed to conduct a proper voir dire of the jury pool, failed to deliver an effective closing argument, and failed to prepare any jury instructions. On direct appeal the Court will only rule on the merits of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim if the record affirmatively shows ineffectiveness of constitutional dimensions, or the parties stipulate that the record is adequate to allow the appellate court to make the finding without consideration of the findings of fact of the trial judge. The parties have not made a stipulation as to the record. The record shows that trial counsel for Jones did ask some improper questions to jurors during voir dire, but they were not of any constitutional significance. Some statements by counsel during closing argument may have been improper but were made to assist Jones, and did not prejudice his defense. Defense counsel’s decision to not prepare any jury instructions may have been a part of trial strategy or may be an indication of the quality of the defense Jones received. The record reflects that the fairness of the trial Jones received was not affected by the actions of his counsel. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court