Young v. State
| Docket Number: | 2007-KA-00989-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 07-29-2008 Opinion Author: GRIFFIS, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Murder - Hearsay - M.R.E. 801(c) - Right to confront witnesses - Weight 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: 06-04-2007 Appealed from: LEE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: Sharion R. Aycock Disposition: CONVICTED OF MURDER AND SENTENCED TO SERVE A LIFE SENTENCE IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS District Attorney: John Richard Young Case Number: CR07-178 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | BERNARD YOUNG |
GEORGE T. HOLMES |
|
|
| Appellee: | STATE OF MISSISSIPPI | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: LAURA HOGAN TEDDER | ||
| Appellee #2: | ||||
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 - Hearsay - M.R.E. 801(c) - Right to confront witnesses - Weight of evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Bernard Young was convicted of murder. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Hearsay An information officer for the Lee County Sheriff’s Department testified that the victim came into the sheriff’s department to file a stalking complaint. While she was taking down the report, a black man, who she later identified as Young, came into the lobby and told the victim, “I would just like to talk to you” and the victim replied, “I’m tired of you following me. I just want you to leave me alone. I’m taking out papers.” The trial judge allowed this statement to be admitted in evidence under M.R.E. 803(1) and 803(3). Young argues the statements were hearsay that do not fall under any exception. Here, the evidence offered did not meet the definition of hearsay under M.R.E. 801(c). The evidence was not offered to prove that Young was in fact stalking the victim. Instead, the statements establish that Young had notice that the victim wanted to file a police report against him. Issue 2: Right to confront witnesses Young argues that the statements the victim made to him in front of the information officer violate his constitutional right to confront witnesses. The Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment bars admission of testimonial statements of a witness who did not appear at trial unless he was unavailable to testify, and the defendant had had a prior opportunity for cross-examination. A statement is testimonial when it is given to the police or individuals working in connection with the police for the purpose of prosecuting the accused. Even though the purported conversation took place in the lobby of the sheriff’s department, the statements made by the victim to Young were not given to law enforcement for purposes of prosecuting Young. Issue 3: Weight of evidence Young’s assignment of error regarding the weight of the evidence is procedurally barred because he did not file a motion for a new trial. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
