Forrest v. State


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2009-KA-01729-COA

Court of Appeals: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 11-16-2010
Opinion Author: Lee, P.J.
Holding: Affirmed.

Additional Case Information: Topic: Aggravated assault & Possession of weapon by convicted felon - Competency - Ineffective assistance of counsel
Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Myers, P.J., Irving, Griffis, Barnes, Ishee, Roberts, Carlton and Maxwell, JJ.
Procedural History: Jury Trial
Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 10-12-2009
Appealed from: MONTGOMERY COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
Judge: Joseph H. Loper
Disposition: CONVICTED OF COUNT I, AGGRAVATED ASSAULT, AND SENTENCED TO TWENTY YEARS; AND COUNT II, POSSESSION OF A FIREARM BY A CONVICTED FELON, AND SENTENCED TO TEN YEARS, ALL AS A HABITUAL OFFENDER, WITHOUT ELIGIBILITY FOR PAROLE OR PROBATION, WITH THE SENTENCE IMPOSED IN COUNT II TO RUN CONSECUTIVELY TO THE SENTENCE IMPOSED IN COUNT I, ALL IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
District Attorney: DOUG EVANS
Case Number: 2009-0043CR

  Party Name: Attorney Name:  
Appellant: John Forrest




LESLIE S. LEE



 

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: Aggravated assault & Possession of weapon by convicted felon - Competency - Ineffective assistance of counsel

Summary of the Facts: John Forrest was convicted of Count I, aggravated assault, and Count II, possession of a weapon by a convicted felon. Forrest was sentenced as a habitual offender to twenty years on Count I and ten years on Count II. Forrest appeals.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: Issue 1: Competency Forrest argues that the trial court should have ordered a competency hearing sua sponte. The test for reviewing a trial court’s failure to inquire into a defendant’s competence is whether the trial judge received information which, objectively considered, should reasonably have raised a doubt about defendant’s competency and alerted him to the possibility that the defendant could neither understand the proceedings, appreciate their significance, nor rationally aid his attorney in his defense. Evidence of a defendant’s irrational behavior, his demeanor at trial, and any prior medical opinion on competence to stand trial are all relevant in determining whether further inquiry is required. Here, there is nothing to show that Forrest did not understand the proceedings against him or appreciate their significance. Forrest admitted he was drunk on the night of the shooting and denied his culpability, but Forrest’s theory of defense was that he had accidentally shot the victim. Furthermore, there was no evidence that Forrest had any relevant medical problems that would have affected his ability to stand trial. Issue 2: Ineffective assistance of counsel Forrest argues that his trial counsel was ineffective. The merits of an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim on direct appeal should be addressed only when the record affirmatively shows ineffectiveness of constitutional dimensions, or the parties stipulate that the record is adequate to allow the appellate court to make the finding without consideration of the findings of fact of the trial judge. The record does not contain evidence of ineffectiveness of constitutional dimensions. Thus, Forrest’s ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim is denied without prejudice to his right to raise the issue via appropriate post-conviction proceedings if he so chooses.


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