Graves v. State


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2006-KA-01730-SCT

Supreme Court: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 11-29-2007
Opinion Author: Lamar, J.
Holding: Affirmed

Additional Case Information: Topic: Aggravated assault & Shooting into vehicle - Double jeopardy
Judge(s) Concurring: Smith, C.J., Waller and Diaz, P.JJ., Easley, Carlson, Graves, Dickinson and Randolph, JJ.
Procedural History: Jury Trial
Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 05-09-2006
Appealed from: Hinds County Circuit Court
Judge: Winston Kidd
Disposition: Count I: Conviction of aggravated assault and sentence of ten (10) years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections; Count II: Conviction of shooting into vehicle and sentence of five (5) years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections; Sentence in Count II shall run consecutively with the sentence imposed in Count I.
District Attorney: Eleanor Faye Peterson
Case Number: 04-0-936

  Party Name: Attorney Name:  
Appellant: Kendrick Graves




THOMAS W. POWELL



 

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: Aggravated assault & Shooting into vehicle - Double jeopardy

Summary of the Facts: Kendrick Graves was convicted of aggravated assault and shooting into a vehicle. Graves was sentenced to consecutive terms of ten years imprisonment for aggravated assault and five years imprisonment for shooting into a vehicle. He appeals.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: Graves argues that his prosecution for both aggravated assault and shooting into a vehicle constituted double jeopardy. The applicable rule is that where the same act or transaction constitutes a violation of two distinct statutory provisions, the test to be applied to determine whether there are two offenses or only one, is whether each provision requires proof of a fact which the other does not. For the jury to find Graves guilty of aggravated assault, the State was required to prove that Graves purposely or knowingly, unlawfully and not in necessary self-defense, caused bodily injury to Washington; that he used a deadly weapon, in this case, a gun, to do so; and that shooting Washington caused the bodily injury. For the jury to find Graves guilty of shooting into a vehicle, the State was required to prove that Graves shot a firearm into a motor vehicle. To prove aggravated assault, no element requires proof of a firearm being shot into a vehicle. To prove shooting into a vehicle, there is no requirement of proof of bodily injury. Clearly, aggravated assault and shooting into a vehicle each requires proof of facts the other does not. It is inconsequential that these two crimes took place at the same time or that the same evidence was used to convict Graves of both of these crimes.


Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court