Jones v. State
| Docket Number: | 2009-KA-00039-SCT Linked Case(s): 2009-KA-00039-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 05-13-2010 Opinion Author: Pierce, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Murder - Weathersby rule - Sufficiency of evidence Judge(s) Concurring: Waller, C.J., Carlson, P.J., Dickinson, Randolph, Lamar, Kitchens and Chandler, JJ. Concurs in Result Only: Graves, P.J. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 11-10-2008 Appealed from: Jones County Circuit Court Judge: Billy Joe Landrum Disposition: Conviction of Murder and Sentence of Life Imprisonment in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections, with conditions. District Attorney: Anthony J. Buckley Case Number: 2007-294-KR2 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Andre J. Jones |
LESLIE S. LEE, MICHAEL DUANE MITCHELL, BENJAMIN ALLEN SUBER |
||
| 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: | Murder - Weathersby rule - Sufficiency of evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Andre Jones was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. Jones appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Weathersby rule Andre argues that he should have been acquitted as a matter of law pursuant to the Weathersby rule. The Weathersby rule provides that where the defendant or the defendant’s witnesses are the only eye witnesses to the homicide, their version, if reasonable, must be accepted as true, unless substantially contradicted in material particulars by a credible witness or witnesses for the state, or by physical facts or by the facts of common knowledge. The rule does not apply where the defendant’s version is patently unreasonable, or contradicted by physical facts where the accused, following the slaying, gives conflicting versions of how the killing took place; or he initially denies the act. In situations where the rule becomes inapplicable, the case then becomes an issue for the jury. Although Andre argues that his version of the events from the night in question is reasonable and is not materially contradicted by the other evidence, a review of the record indicates otherwise. The testimony provided by two witnesses was in direct contradiction to the testimony of the defendant. Further, the physical evidence provided by the State materially contradicted the testimony of the defendant. The case was a matter for the jury to decide, and the jury accepted the State’s version of events. Issue 2: Sufficiency of evidence Andre argues that the evidence supports a finding that he acted in self-defense and that he had no deliberate design to murder the victim. He argues alternatively that the evidence presented meets the elements of manslaughter and should be considered a heat-of-passion crime. The evidence showed that Andre was the aggressor and instigator throughout the day. Evidence indicated that there was no provocation from the victim, and Andre had intent the moment he engaged the victim in the fight with the knife. Andre had a chance to run away and avoid the fight. Instead, he followed the victim into the house and engaged him in a knife fight. Thus, the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
