Brooks v. State
| Docket Number: | 2000-KA-02135-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 01-28-2003 Opinion Author: McMillin, C.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Kidnapping - Self-representation - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Juror misconduct Judge(s) Concurring: King and Southwick, P.JJ., Bridges, Thomas, Lee, Irving, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 10-19-2000 Appealed from: Oktibbeha County Circuit Court Judge: John M. Montgomery Disposition: CONVICTED OF KIDNAPING WITH THIRTY YEARS IMPRISONMENT, NOT TO BE SUSPENDED OR REDUCED, AND WITHOUT ELIGIBILITY OF PAROLE OR PROBATION District Attorney: Forrest Allgood Case Number: 199-041-CR |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Morris Brooks |
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: DEIRDRE MCCRORY |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | CARRIE A. JOURDAN |
|
|
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: | Kidnapping - Self-representation - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Juror misconduct |
| Summary of the Facts: | Morris Brooks was convicted of kidnapping and sentenced to thirty years. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Self-representation Brooks argues that the court erred in acceding to his demand to represent himself. Although a defendant desiring to represent himself at trial has a constitutional right to do so, the court must be satisfied that the defendant has knowingly and voluntarily elected to represent himself. In this case, Brooks’ answers to the court’s inquiries were intelligent and appropriate, and he appears to have been alert and focused on the issues being discussed. There is not enough contrary information in the record to show that the trial court abused its discretion. Issue 2: Ineffective assistance of counsel Having elected to represent himself, Brooks cannot now claim that his court-appointed attorney was so deficient that Brooks was denied his constitutional right to effective representation. Issue 3: Juror misconduct Brooks argues that the court erred in denying his motion for new trial based on a claim that one of the jurors at trial had failed to reveal during voir dire that he was personally acquainted with Brooks. The trial court concluded that Brooks was being untruthful in denying that he did not recognize the juror as a former acquaintance and that Brooks had purposely elected to leave the juror on the jury. The trial court sits as finder of fact regarding issues of credibility of testimony. Here, the court did not abuse its discretion in disbelieving Brooks' facially incredible version of why he was untimely in raising the issue of his prior relationship with the juror. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
