Tanner v. State
| Docket Number: | 2008-KA-01540-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 11-03-2009 Opinion Author: MYERS, P.J. Holding: AFFIRMED |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Sexual battery - Amendment of indictment - Motion to suppress telephone recording - Weight of evidence Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C.J., LEE, P.J., IRVING, GRIFFIS, BARNES, ISHEE, ROBERTS, CARLTON AND MAXWELL, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 07-28-2008 Appealed from: Jackson County Circuit Court Judge: Kathy King Jackson Disposition: CONVICTED OF SEXUAL BATTERY AND SENTENCED TO TWENTY YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, WITH FOURTEEN YEARS TO SERVE AND SIX YEARS OF POST-RELEASE SUPERVISION District Attorney: Anthony N. Lawrence, III Case Number: 2004-10,857(2) |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | SCOTT M. TANNER |
GEORGE S. SHADDOCK |
|
|
| 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: | Sexual battery - Amendment of indictment - Motion to suppress telephone recording - Weight of evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Scott Tanner was convicted of sexual battery. The trial court sentenced Tanner to twenty years, with fourteen years to serve and six years of post-release supervision. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Amendment of indictment At the conclusion of its case-in-chief, the State moved to amend the indictment to conform to the proof presented at trial. The State wished to extend the date of the offense. Tanner argues that the trial court erred in amending the indictment because it exposed him to testimony concerning prior bad acts now uncharged. This issue is without merit. While Tanner did initially object to the State’s motion to amend the indictment, he later not only consented to an amendment, but argued for the specific date range that the trial court ultimately adopted. He cannot now complain that the trial court wrongfully amended the indictment. Issue 2: Motion to suppress telephone recording Tanner argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress an audiotape of a telephone conversation between Tanner and the victim. Tanner cites no relevant authority supporting this proposition. As such, this argument is barred from review. In addition, he cites nothing in the record that could render the recording constitutionally suspect. Issue 3: Weight of evidence Tanner argues that the guilty verdict is contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence. The victim testified that she had been repeatedly raped by Tanner, and this was corroborated by her father’s testimony and a medical examination. While Tanner made no express admissions of guilt, when confronted with the allegations he did not deny them but simply stated that he did not know why he had not admitted them to the victim’s father. The jury’s verdict is not so contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence that to allow it to stand would sanction an unconscionable injustice. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
