Poole v. State
Docket Number: | 2009-KA-00420-SCT Linked Case(s): 2009-KA-00420-SCT |
|
Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 08-12-2010 Opinion Author: Dickinson, J. Holding: Affirmed. |
|
Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Statutory rape - Sufficiency of evidence - Evidence of penetration Judge(s) Concurring: Waller, C.J., Carlson, P.J., Randolph, Lamar, Kitchens, Chandler and Pierce, JJ. Concurs in Result Only: Graves, P.J. Procedural History: Jury Trial; JNOV Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 02-27-2009 Appealed from: MONROE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: Paul S. Funderburk Disposition: Conviction of statutory rape and sentence of twenty (20) years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections, with ten (10) years suspended, and five (5) years of post-release supervision, with conditions. District Attorney: John Richard Young Case Number: CR-2008-000085 |
Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
Appellant: | James David Poole a/k/a Jim |
GARY GOODWIN |
|
|
Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: LAURA H. TEDDER |
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: | Statutory rape - Sufficiency of evidence - Evidence of penetration |
Summary of the Facts: | James Poole was convicted of one count of statutory rape. He appeals. |
Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Poole argues that his conviction was against the sufficiency and the weight of the evidence. He argues that the evidence as to whether he had sexual intercourse with the victim was insufficient. An individual may be found guilty of rape on the uncorroborated testimony of the prosecuting witness, where the testimony is not discredited or contradicted by other credible evidence. Poole argues that the uncontradicted evidence of the victim’s intact hymen contradicts her testimony. Although the Court has never adopted the rule that evidence of an intact hymen is not conclusive proof that there was no penetration, decisions from sister states which hold that evidence of an intact hymen is not conclusive proof that no penetration occurred are compelling. Thus, the evidence given by the victim’s testimony in this case was sufficient to establish the element of sexual intercourse. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court