Moses v. State
| Docket Number: | 2008-KA-01285-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 03-02-2010 Opinion Author: Irving, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Carjacking - Circumstantial evidence instruction - Sufficiency of evidence - Admission of evidence Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Griffis, Ishee and Maxwell, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Carlton, J. Concurs in Result Only: Barnes and Roberts, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 06-16-2008 Appealed from: WASHINGTON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: Richard Smith Disposition: CONVICTED OF CARJACKING AND SENTENCED TO FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND TO PAY A $2,500 FINE District Attorney: Willie Dewayne Richardson Case Number: 2007-285 |
|
| Note: | Due to a military leave of absence, Hon. Virginia C. Carlton did not participate in this hand down. | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | JERRY MOSES |
E. TUCKER GORE |
|
|
| Appellee: | STATE OF MISSISSIPPI | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: 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: | Carjacking - Circumstantial evidence instruction - Sufficiency of evidence - Admission of evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Jerry Moses was convicted of carjacking and was sentenced to fifteen years. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Circumstantial evidence instruction Moses argues that the trial court erred in failing to grant his request for a circumstantial-evidence jury instruction. A circumstantial-evidence instruction is required only when the prosecution can produce neither an eyewitness nor a confession/statement by the defendant. Here, the State failed to produce an eyewitness that negated the necessity for a circumstantial-evidence instruction. Accordingly, the trial court erred in failing to grant a circumstantial-evidence instruction. Nevertheless, the court’s error does not warrant a reversal, as the evidence against Moses, though circumstantial, is overwhelming. Issue 2: Sufficiency of evidence Moses argues that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction. However, he fails to point to any such deficiency. The record clearly indicates that two males, acting in concert, took the victim’s vehicle by force in violation of section 97-3-117(1). Although the victim was unable to identify her attackers, the evidence is overwhelming that those two males were Moses and another man. Issue 3: Admission of evidence Moses argues that the trial court erred in allowing an investigator to testify concerning a statement that was provided to him by the co-defendant wherein the co-defendant implicated Moses as being present at the scene on the morning of the carjacking. The audiotape and transcript of the co-defendant’s statement were not allowed into evidence but were merely marked for identification purposes, to which the defense did not object. The court did allow the investigator to testify as to a portion of what the co-defendant told him. However, this was because counsel for Moses opened the door during his cross-examination of the investigator. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
