Watson v. State
| Docket Number: | 2007-CA-01199-COA Linked Case(s): 2007-KA-01199-COA ; 2007-CA-01199-COA ; 2007-CT-01199-SCT |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 10-14-2008 Opinion Author: LEE, P.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Feloniously eluding a police officer - Hearsay - M.R.E. 801(c) - M.R.E. 802 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: 03-12-2007 Appealed from: Hinds County Circuit Court Judge: Bobby DeLaughter Disposition: CONVICTED OF ELUDING A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER AND SENTENCED TO FIVE YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS WITH ONE YEAR SUSPENDED AND TWO YEARS OF SUPERVISED PROBATION District Attorney: Eleanor Faye Peterson Case Number: 05-0-580 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | DELORIS JEAN WATSON |
WILLIAM R. LABARRE,
VIRGINIA L. WATKINS |
|
|
| 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: | Feloniously eluding a police officer - Hearsay - M.R.E. 801(c) - M.R.E. 802 |
| Summary of the Facts: | Deloris Watson was convicted of feloniously eluding a police officer. She was sentenced to five years, with one year suspended and two years of supervised probation. She appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Watson argues that the trial court allowed improper hearsay evidence from an officer regarding information given to him by a Wal-Mart employee. At trial, the officer testified that a Wal-Mart employee told him that she believed two women in the store were shoplifting, one of whom was Watson. The officer’s testimony referencing the manager’s comments was not hearsay under M.R.C.P. 801© and was properly admitted under M.R.E. 802. Watson was not charged with shoplifting. Therefore, the testimony complained of was not used to prove the truth of whether or not Watson shoplifted. The purpose of the testimony was to show why the officer followed Watson into the parking lot where she fled from him. Even if the officer’s statement did qualify as hearsay, it would still be admissible to the extent required to show why he acted as he did and why he was at a particular place at a particular time. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
