Murray v. State


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2006-KA-01950-SCT
Linked Case(s): 2006-KA-01950

Supreme Court: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 11-08-2007
Opinion Author: Randolph, J.
Holding: Affirmed

Additional Case Information: Topic: Felonious operation of motor vehicle while under influence of intoxicating liquor - Right to speedy trial - Sufficiency of evidence
Judge(s) Concurring: Smith, C.J., Waller, P.J., Easley, Carlson, Dickinson and Lamar, JJ.
Concurs in Result Only: Diaz, P.J., and Graves, J.
Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 08-22-2006
Appealed from: Lincoln County Circuit Court
Judge: Michael M. Taylor
Disposition: On August 22, 2006, Murray was tried in the Circuit Court of Lincoln County and found guilty by a jury of felonious operation of a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. As a habitual offender, Murray was sentenced to five years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections to be served day for day.
District Attorney: Dee Bates
Case Number: 05-087LT

  Party Name: Attorney Name:  
Appellant: Anthony Wayne Murray




JASON E. TATE



 

Appellee: State of Mississippi OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL  

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: Felonious operation of motor vehicle while under influence of intoxicating liquor - Right to speedy trial - Sufficiency of evidence

Summary of the Facts: Anthony Murray was convicted of felonious operation of a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. As a habitual offender, Murray was sentenced to five years. He appeals.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: Issue 1: Right to speedy trial Murray argues that he was denied due process when the circuit court denied his motion to dismiss for lack of speedy trial. A proper analysis of Murray’s statutory right applies the actual date of arraignment after re-indictment. Following Murray’s re-indictment on March 4, 2005, he filed a “Waiver of Arraignment” on April 3, 2006, after being extradited to Lincoln County. Between his “Waiver of Arraignment” on April 3, 2006, and the commencement of the jury trial on August 22, 2006, only 141 days passed. Therefore, the circuit court’s denial of Murray’s statutory speedy-trial claim was supported by substantial, credible evidence. With regard to his constitutional right, the court looks at the length of delay, reason for delay, defendant’s assertion of his right, and any resulting prejudice. Between Murray’s arrest and the commencement of the jury trial, 865 days passed which is presumptively prejudicial. 473 days of the delay are attributable to the State, albeit with limited weight, given the absence of evidence indicating intentional delay. Murray’s motion was not filed until the vast majority of the delay period had elapsed which weighs in the State’s favor. Murray’s allegations of prejudice in being fired following his arrest and being required to pay for another bond because Griffith Bonding went out of business, in no way impaired Murray’s defense. Given these factors, substantial, credible evidence supported the circuit court’s denial of Murray’s constitutional speedy-trial claim. Issue 2: Sufficiency of evidence Murray argues that the State was not able to provide any conclusive evidence that he was driving the truck when it ran off the road and hit a tree. There was sufficient credible evidence from which it could be reasonably inferred that Murray was operating the truck at the time of the accident. Murray’s claim that another man was driving the truck conflicts with the testimony of the man’s wife, who testified that he was home with her during the entire evening and was in no way involved in the accident. Upon arriving at the scene, another witness testified that Murray was the only individual present. Furthermore, Murray admitted to the witness that he was the driver of the truck at the scene.


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