Baker v. State
| Docket Number: | 2007-KA-01583-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 09-16-2008 Opinion Author: Lee, P.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Possession of precursor chemicals with intent to manufacture methamphetamine - Motion to suppress - Closing argument Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Myers,, P.J., Irving, Chandler, GRIFFIS, Barnes, Ishee, Roberts, and Carlton, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 07-13-2007 Appealed from: Coahoma County Circuit Court Judge: Charles E. Webster Disposition: CONVICTED OF COUNT I, MANUFACTURE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE, AND SENTENCED TO TEN YEARS WITH FIVE YEARS OF POST-RELEASE SUPERVISION; COUNT II, POSSESSION OF PRECURSOR CHEMICALS WITH INTENT TO MANUFACTURE A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE, AND SENTENCED TO TEN YEARS WITH FIVE YEARS OF POSTRELEASE SUPERVISION; COUNT III, CONSPIRACY, AND SENTENCED TO THREE YEARS, WITH SENTENCES IN COUNTS II AND III TO RUN CONCURRENTLY TO SENTENCE IN COUNT I, ALL IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, A FINE OF $10,000, AND A FEE OF $600 TO THE MISSISSIPPI CRIME LABORATORY District Attorney: Laurence Y. Mellen Case Number: 2005-0129 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | GREGORY VINCENT BAKER |
W. DANIEL HINCHCLIFF |
|
|
| Appellee: | STATE OF MISSISSIPPI | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: STEPHANIE BRELAND WOOD | ||
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 precursor chemicals with intent to manufacture methamphetamine - Motion to suppress - Closing argument |
| Summary of the Facts: | Gregory Baker was convicted of Count I, manufacturing methamphetamine; Count II, possession of precursor chemicals with intent to manufacture methamphetamine; and Count III, conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine. On Count I, Baker was sentenced to ten years with five years post-release supervision. On Count II, Baker was sentenced to ten years with five years post-release supervision. On Count III, he was sentenced to three years. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Motion to suppress Baker argues that the court erred in denying his motion to suppress the evidence seized in the deputies’ search of his home, because the deputies’ presence on his property was the result of an anonymous tip that lacked reliability and was based on stale evidence. Baker’s assertion that the deputies should not have responded to the anonymous tip is without merit. The tip, even though from an anonymous informant, contained sufficient evidence to warrant a further investigation. The caller gave the deputies fresh information – that she had just left Baker’s residence and saw people “cooking drugs” – and the deputies were familiar with Baker’s address because they had responded to drug-related incidents at his residence in the past. Thus, the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in finding that the deputies had a duty to further investigate the anonymous tip. Issue 2: Closing argument Baker argues that the trial court erred by allowing the State to allude in closing arguments to Baker’s choice not to testify on his own behalf. The standard of review that appellate courts must apply to lawyer misconduct during opening statements or closing arguments is whether the natural and probable effect of the improper argument is to create unjust prejudice against the accused so as to result in a decision influenced by the prejudice so created. Given the overwhelming evidence against Baker, no unjust prejudice was created such that the statements influenced the jury’s decision. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
