Roach v. State
| Docket Number: | 2005-KA-00237-COA Linked Case(s): 2005-KA-00237-COA ; 2005-CT-00237-SCT ; 2005-CT-00237-SCT |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 08-21-2007 Opinion Author: IRVING, J. Holding: Reversed and Remanded |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Possession of cocaine & Possession of hydromorphone - Suppression of search warrant - Identity of confidential informant - Constitutionality of sentence Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C.J., LEE, P.J., CHANDLER, BARNES AND ISHEE, JJ. Dissenting Author : MYERS, P.J. Dissent Joined By : GRIFFIS, ROBERTS AND CARLTON, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-30-2004 Appealed from: Hinds County Circuit Court Judge: Bobby DeLaughter Disposition: CONVICTED IN COUNT I OF POSSESSION OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE (COCAINE) AND SENTENCED TO FORTY-EIGHT YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AS A HABITUAL OFFENDER, AND CONVICTED IN COUNT II OF POSSESSION OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE (HYDROMORPHONE) AND SENTENCED TO SIXTY YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AS A HABITUAL OFFENDER,WITH THE SENTENCE IN COUNT I TO RUN CONSECUTIVE TO THE SENTENCE IN COUNT II. District Attorney: Eleanor Faye Peterson Case Number: 03-772CRD |
|
| Note: | Miss SCT reversed and remanded this COA judgment. See SCT opinion at: http://www.mssc.state.ms.us/Images/Opinions/CO54737.pdf | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | JIMMIE ROACH |
JULIE ANN EPPS |
||
| 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: | Possession of cocaine & Possession of hydromorphone - Suppression of search warrant - Identity of confidential informant - Constitutionality of sentence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Jimmie Roach was convicted of possession of cocaine and possession of hydromorphone and was sentenced to forty-eight years for the cocaine possession and sixty years for the hydromorphone possession, both as a habitual offender. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Suppression of search warrant Roach argues that the court erred in denying his motion to suppress the search warrant and its fruits. When a confidential informant is used to obtain a search warrant, the informant’s observations must be shown to be truthful or reliable. Corroboration of a CI’s information usually consists of a statement that the officer had successfully used the CI in the past or that the suspect had a prior criminal record relating to the current investigation or that an undercover agent had seen the suspect engaging in behavior consistent with the current investigation. If an affidavit does not contain any corroborating evidence of a CI’s truthfulness and reliability, probable cause does not exist for the issuance of a search warrant. In this case, the officer’s affidavit states that the CI in question had furnished him “with information in the past that has proven to be true and correct regarding the trafficking of illicit narcotics. . . .” However, the officer’s testimony during the suppression hearing indicates that the CI had never provided him with information prior to January 22, 2003. Although the officer waffled and attempted to rectify the situation by asserting that the CI had provided him with credible information in the past that had not actually led to arrests, another officer’s testimony clarified that it was apparent when the first officer and the CI met on January 22, 2003, that the two had never met before. While similar language has been used in numerous probable cause affidavits that have formed the basis for search warrants in this state, there is no case where similar language was used in reference to only one experience with the CI in question. Under these circumstances, probable cause did not exist for the issuance of the search warrant, and the fruits of the search warrant should be suppressed. Issue 2: Identity of confidential informant The identity of a CI must be revealed, upon request by the defense, if the CI participates in the crime or if the CI is an eyewitness to the offense. There is no evidence here to indicate that the CI in question was in any way a participant in Roach’s crime. In addition, the CI was not an eyewitness to the crime, and disclosure of his identity is not required. Issue 3: Constitutionality of sentence Roach argues that the court abused its discretion in sentencing him to the maximum possible term of incarceration for his convictions. However, the Mississippi Supreme Court has made clear that a sentence within the statutory limits, like the one imposed on Roach, is acceptable and will be upheld on appeal. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
