Travis v. State
| Docket Number: | 2007-KA-00236-COA Linked Case(s): 2007-KA-00236-SCT ; 2007-KA-00236-COA ; 2007-CT-00236-SCT |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 12-16-2008 Opinion Author: KING, C.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Burglary - Right to speedy trial - Sufficiency of evidence Judge(s) Concurring: Lee and Myers, P.JJ., 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: 09-25-2006 Appealed from: Hinds County Circuit Court Judge: Bobby DeLaughter Disposition: CONVICTED OF BURGLARY OF A DWELLING AND SENTENCTED TO TWENTYFIVE YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS WITH TEN YEARS SUSPENDED AND FIVE YEARS OF SUPERVISED PROBATION District Attorney: Eleanor Faye Peterson Case Number: 04-0-535 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | BOBBY L. TRAVIS |
VIRGINIA LYNN WATKINS |
|
|
| 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: | Burglary - Right to speedy trial - Sufficiency of evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Bobby Travis was convicted of burglary and sentenced to twenty-five years with fifteen years to serve, ten years suspended, and five years of supervised probation. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Right to speedy trial Travis argues that the trial court erred in denying his claims of violation of his state and federal constitutional rights to a speedy trial. The time between the arrest of Travis and his trial, a period of nearly thirty-six months, was presumptively prejudicial. When considering all of the balancing factors, the nearly one-year delay is charged to the State, while the remainder of time until trial is either weighed against the defendant or not weighed heavily against the State. There is no error in the trial court’s determination that Travis did not suffer undue prejudice. Based on these facts, there was substantial evidence to support the trial court’s decision that Travis’s constitutional and statutory speedy trial rights were not violated. Issue 2: Sufficiency of evidence Travis argues that his conviction hinges on tenuous evidence and virtually no direct evidence. It is true that while the victim’s testimony detailed his brutal kidnaping and the burglary of his apartment, he was unable to identify his assailants. However, his testimony regarding Travis’s motive for the crime was clearly set out. As to other evidence which pointed to Travis’s guilt, there was the extensive testimony of a witness who testified that he saw Travis and another man push into the victim’s apartment with guns and then bring two people out with their hands bound and eyes blindfolded. He testified that Travis brought four laundry bags full of items from the apartment and placed them in the back of the truck. Addition items taken from the apartment were also found in an automobile belonging to Travis. Further, the police detective found items from the apartment and a ski mask in a car belonging to Travis that was parked at the scene of the crime. This evidence meets every element of the crime of house burglary. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
