Edwards v. State
| Docket Number: | 2007-KA-01064-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 12-16-2008 Opinion Author: GRIFFIS, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Aggravated assault - Unanimous decision - URCCC 3.10 - Evidentiary hearing Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Chandler, Barnes, Ishee, Barnes, Iishee, Roberts, and Carlton, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 04-25-2007 Appealed from: Bolivar County Circuit Court Judge: Al Smith Disposition: CONVICTED OF AGGRAVATED ASSAULT AND SENTENCED TO SIX YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, WITH TWO YEARS TO SERVE AND FOUR YEARS SUSPENDED District Attorney: Laurence Y. Mellen Case Number: 2007-004-CR1 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | KANETHIA EDWARDS |
JOHNNIE E. WALLS |
|
|
| Appellee: | STATE OF MISSISSIPPI | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: LISA LYNN BLOUNT | ||
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: | Aggravated assault - Unanimous decision - URCCC 3.10 - Evidentiary hearing |
| Summary of the Facts: | Kanethia Edwards was convicted of aggravated assault and was sentenced to six years, with two years to serve and four years suspended. She appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Unanimous decision Edwards argues that the circuit court erred by failing to grant her motion for a new trial when the record shows that the polling of the jury failed to verify a verdict of guilty as reported by the jury and accepted by the circuit court thereby denying her a fair trial. There were no objections from either the State or Edwards’s counsel concerning the unanimity of the verdict. Edwards is procedurally barred from raising this issue. In addition, nothing in URCCC 3.10 requires that each juror give an audible response. It mandates that each juror be asked by the circuit court if the announced verdict is that juror’s verdict. Here, the record clearly shows that the circuit judge determined the verdict to be unanimous. Issue 2: Evidentiary hearing Edwards argues that the circuit judge should have granted an evidentiary hearing for her to set forth proof that the jury based its guilty verdict on a majority vote instead of reaching a unanimous decision as was instructed by the circuit court. This issue is procedurally barred from appeal. Edwards did not raise this issue until she did so in her supplement to the original motion, and she failed to request an evidentiary hearing until her motion for reconsideration. Thus, the circuit court had no power to decide this issue. In addition, Edwards did not show good cause to believe that an improper outside influence or extraneous prejudicial information was introduced. The mere allegation that the jury took a majority vote does not constitute outside influence or extraneous information. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
