Mask v. State
| Docket Number: | 2006-KA-01014-COA Linked Case(s): 2006-KA-01014-COA ; 2006-CT-01014-SCT |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 06-24-2008 Opinion Author: GRIFFIS, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Murder - Flight instruction - M.R.E. 404(b) - M.R.E. 403 - Closing argument - Sufficiency of evidence Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C.J., LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., IRVING, CHANDLER, BARNES, ISHEE, ROBERTS AND CARLTON, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 12-14-2005 Appealed from: Alcorn County Circuit Court Judge: Paul S. Funderburk Disposition: CONVICTED OF MURDER AND SENTENCED TO SERVE A TERM OF LIFE IMPRISONMENT WITHOUT PAROLE IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS District Attorney: John Richard Young Case Number: CR04-261 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | PERRY L. MASK |
CLAY SPENCER NAILS |
|
|
| Appellee: | STATE OF MISSISSIPPI | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: DEIRDRE MCCRORY | ||
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: | Murder - Flight instruction - M.R.E. 404(b) - M.R.E. 403 - Closing argument - Sufficiency of evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Perry Mask was convicted of murder and sentenced to life without parole. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Flight instruction Mask argues that the trial court erred when it accepted a flight instruction. A flight instruction is appropriate only where the flight is unexplained and somehow probative of guilt or guilty knowledge. Therefore, evidence of flight is inadmissible where there is an independent reason for the flight. Also, it is well settled that evidence of flight or escape is admissible as an exception to M.R.E. 404(b) in order to show guilty knowledge. While evidence of flight is admissible under Rule 404(b), it must be filtered through M.R.E. 403. Here, the trial judge decided to give the flight instruction after he found that Mask had not put forward any evidence that explained the flight, and he found that the evidence of flight was admissible under Rule 403. Mask did not offer any evidence of an alternative explanation for why he fled the scene of the shooting, and the court did not err in granting the instruction. Issue 2: Closing argument Mask argues that the trial court erred by not declaring a mistrial because the State, during its closing argument, commented on his right not to testify. Any allegedly improper prosecutorial comment must be considered in context, considering the circumstances of the case. Here, the State did not infringe on Mask’s right not to testify. The prosecutor merely attempted to rebut the accusations made by Mask’s attorney in his closing argument that the State did not call enough witnesses or present all the evidence that was available to them. Issue 3: Sufficiency of evidence Mask argues that there was not sufficient evidence because an investigator testified that Mask claimed that he shot the victim in self-defense. A reasonable juror could reject this argument because the victim was shot in the back. A disputed issue of fact does not mean that there is insufficient evidence. The victim’s son testified that Mask approached his father, pointed a gun at his father, and shot his father. Thus, there was sufficient evidence. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
