Simpson v. State
| Docket Number: | 2006-KA-01366-COA Linked Case(s): 2006-KA-01366-COA ; 2006-CT-01366-SCT |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 05-27-2008 Opinion Author: BARNES, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Manslaughter - Sufficiency of evidence - Weathersby rule Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C.J., LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., IRVING, CHANDLER, GRIFFIS, ISHEE, ROBERTS AND CARLTON, JJ., Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 07-21-2006 Appealed from: George County Circuit Court Judge: Dale Harkey Disposition: CONVICTION OF MANSLAUGHTER AND SENTENCE OF TWENTY YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS WITH THE LAST FIVE YEARS UNDER POST-RELEASE SUPERVISION District Attorney: Anthony N. Lawrence, III Case Number: 2004-10,038(3) |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | PATRICIA SIMPSON A/K/A PATRICIA L. SIMPSON |
GLENN S. SWARTZFAGER,
LESLIE S. LEE |
|
|
| Appellee: | STATE OF MISSISSIPPI | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: JOHN R. HENRY | ||
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: | Manslaughter - Sufficiency of evidence - Weathersby rule |
| Summary of the Facts: | Patricia Simpson was convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to twenty years, with the last five years served under post-release supervision. She appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Patricia argues that the evidence is insufficient to support a conviction of manslaughter and that the Weathersby rule entitled her to a directed verdict of acquittal at trial. Under the Weathersby rule, where the defendant or the defendant’s witnesses are the only eyewitnesses to the homicide, their version, if reasonable, must be accepted as true, unless substantially contradicted in material particulars by a credible witness or witnesses for the state, or by the physical facts or by the facts of common knowledge. The rule is not applicable where the defendant’s version of the story is unreasonable or contradicted by physical facts. Other circumstances which preclude application of the Weathersby rule are if the accused gives conflicting versions of how the killing took place or initially denies the act. In this case, Patricia was alone in the home with her husband when he was shot. Her version of the events of her husband’s death is inconsistent and substantially contradicted by the physical facts. Specifically, two of the three forensic pathologist expert witnesses, who testified at trial, agreed that the death was not a suicide because of the absence of any proof of a contact gunshot wound. The gunshot wound did not show evidence of a barrel imprint or gunshot residue, indicative of suicide. While the third pathologist disagreed with the opinions of the other two experts, this merely created an issue for the fact-finder to determine. Additionally, there were inconsistencies in Patricia’s statements regarding her ownership of the gun, from her initially denying knowledge of it, to her admitting she did register the gun in her name. Patricia’s conduct and statements following her husband’s death differ from her version of events recounted at trial. There is sufficient evidence to warrant a conviction of either deliberate-design murder or manslaughter. A deadly weapon was used. There was no evidence of self-defense. The record shows a rational fact-finder could find that Patricia killed her husband with either deliberate design or in the heat of passion, without malice. Scientific evidence of the gunshot wound showed the victim could not have inflicted it himself, either by accident or suicide. There was little motive for suicide. Patricia also argues, while she was charged with murder, she could not be found guilty of manslaughter without violation of her constitutional right to due process. A defendant in a criminal case can be found guilty of a lesser-included offense, so long as it is necessarily a lesser-included offense of the offense charged, without an additional count in the indictment. Additionally, an indictment for murder also includes the lesser-included offense of manslaughter. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
