Chisholm v. State


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2009-KA-00913-COA

Court of Appeals: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 06-29-2010
Opinion Author: Roberts, J.
Holding: Affirmed.

Additional Case Information: Topic: Sexual battery - Excessive sentence
Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Irving, Griffis, Barnes, Ishee and Maxwell, JJ.
Non Participating Judge(s): Carlton, J.
Procedural History: Jury Trial
Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 05-22-2009
Appealed from: Amite County Circuit Court
Judge: Forrest Johnson
Disposition: CONVICTED OF SEXUAL BATTERY AND SENTENCED TO THIRTY YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
District Attorney: Ronnie Lee Harper
Case Number: 09-KR-013

  Party Name: Attorney Name:   Brief(s) Available:
Appellant: Shelby Leroy Chisholm




W. DANIEL HINCHCLIFF



 
  • Appellant #1 Brief

  • Appellee: State of Mississippi OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: 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 - Excessive sentence

    Summary of the Facts: Shelby Chisholm was convicted of sexual battery. The circuit court sentenced Chisholm to thirty years. Chisholm appeals.

    Summary of Opinion Analysis: Chisholm argues that the circuit court imposed a vastly harsher sentence because he chose to go to trial. It is impermissible for a trial judge to impose a heavier sentence based in whole or in part upon a defendant’s exercise of his constitutionally protected right to trial by jury. Here, the circuit court clearly stated that it recognized Chisholm’s right to a trial. The circuit court made it imminently clear that it was not imposing the maximum sentence for sexual battery because Chisholm had exercised his constitutional right to a trial. Instead, the circuit court sentenced Chisholm as it did because Chisholm did not accept responsibility for his actions. The imposition of a sentence, if it is within the limits prescribed by statute, is a matter left to the sound discretion of the trial court. Chisholm does not argue that his sentence is in excess of that which is authorized by law.


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