Lee v. State
| Docket Number: | 1998-KA-01403-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 02-18-2003 Opinion Author: King, P.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Criminal: Murder - Weight of evidence - Defense of insanity - Closing argument - Prior criminal charge Judge(s) Concurring: McMillin, C.J., Southwick, P.J., Bridges, Thomas, Lee, Irving, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ. Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 08-14-1998 Appealed from: Yazoo County Circuit Court Judge: Jannie M. Lewis Disposition: MURDER; LIFE IN MDOC District Attorney: James H. Powell, III Case Number: 8116 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Derrick Ledell Lee |
BELINDA J. STEVENS |
||
| 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: | Criminal: Murder - Weight of evidence - Defense of insanity - Closing argument - Prior criminal charge |
| Summary of the Facts: | Derrick Lee was convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Weight of evidence Lee argues that the evidence was insufficient, because the State was not able to produce any witness testimony as to his ability to distinguish right from wrong at the time of the shooting. A defense of not guilty by reason of insanity requires a showing that at the time of the crime the defendant was laboring under such a defect of reason from disease of the mind as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing or if he did know it, that he did not know that what he was doing was wrong. Two doctors offered conflicting testimony with regard to Lee’s sanity at the time of the crime. Given this, the weight of the evidence supporting the jury's verdict was not such that a reasonable jury could have only found Lee insane and therefore innocent by reason of insanity. Issue 2: Closing argument Lee argues that he suffered prejudice when the State referred to him as a murderer in its closing remarks. The jury is presumed to follow the instructions of the court. Not only was Lee’s objection sustained, but the judge instructed that jury that arguments of counsel were not evidence and should be disregarded if not supported. Issue 3: Prior criminal charge Lee argues that he should have been granted a mistrial, because his case was prejudiced by the comment of a witness about a prior criminal charge. In the absence of serious and irreparable damage, a judge should admonish the jury to disregard the statement or comments. When the judge does so, there is no prejudicial error. Here, the error in making the inappropriate comment before the jury was sufficiently cured by the court's action in sustaining the objection and in requesting the jury to disregard the remark. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
