Watts v. State


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2006-KA-02145-COA

Court of Appeals: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 01-29-2008
Opinion Author: ROBERTS, J.
Holding: Affirmed

Additional Case Information: Topic: Possession of controlled substance - Constructive possession instruction
Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C.J., LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., IRVING, CHANDLER, GRIFFIS, BARNES, ISHEE AND CARLTON, JJ.
Procedural History: Jury Trial
Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 12-07-2006
Appealed from: LOWNDES COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
Judge: Lee J. Howard
Disposition: CONVICTION OF POSSESSION OF MARIJUANA IN AN AMOUNT GREATER THAN ONE KILOGRAM AS A SUBSEQUENT OFFENDER AND SENTENCE OF TWENTY-TWO YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS.
District Attorney: Forrest Allgood
Case Number: 2006-0258-CR1

  Party Name: Attorney Name:  
Appellant: DEEVELL DUPREE WATTS




W. DANIEL HINCHCLIFF



 

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: Possession of controlled substance - Constructive possession instruction

Summary of the Facts: Deevell Watts was convicted of possession of a controlled substance. He appeals.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: Watts argues that the trial court erred in refusing his request for a jury instruction on constructive possession, because the court denied him his right to present his theory of the case. While Watts’ proposed jury instructions are an accurate expression of the law of constructive possession, the record clearly reveals that there was a lack of evidence supporting such an instruction. Watts was traveling in a vehicle other than his own when he was stopped by law enforcement, and he confessed to possession of marijuana that was found in the vehicle. There was no testimony or other evidence introduced during Watts’ trial that contradicted the agent’s testimony of Watts’ confession. Since there are no facts in the record which would have supported a constructive possession instruction, the court did not err in refusing to allow the instruction.


Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court