Abraham v. State
| Docket Number: | 2009-CP-01759-COA Linked Case(s): 2009-CP-01759-COA |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 12-07-2010 Opinion Author: Griffis, J. Holding: Affirmed. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Traffic citations - Petition for writ of certiorari - Duty to forward record - Section 99-35-1 - Section 99-17-9 Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Barnes, Ishee, Roberts and Carlton, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Irving and Maxwell, JJ. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: Petition for Writ of Certiorari |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-10-2009 Appealed from: DeSoto County Circuit Court Judge: Robert P. Chamberlin Disposition: PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI DENIED District Attorney: JOHN W. CHAMPION Case Number: CV2009-0196CD |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Albert Abraham, Jr. |
PRO SE |
|
|
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: JOHN R. HENRY JR. | ||
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: | Traffic citations - Petition for writ of certiorari - Duty to forward record - Section 99-35-1 - Section 99-17-9 |
| Summary of the Facts: | Albert Abraham was issued two traffic citations or tickets: one for driving ninety-one miles per hour in a seventy mile-per-hour zone, and another for following too closely. Abraham failed to appear before the Justice Court, and the court found Abraham guilty in absentia for both traffic offenses. Abraham filed a petition for writ of certiorari in the circuit court claiming that the only evidence presented to the justice court as to his guilt was the traffic citations or tickets which was insufficient to prove a defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The court denied the petition, and Abraham appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Abraham argues that the circuit court abused its discretion “[b]ecause it was the duty of the justice court to send the record up and failing in that, it was the duty of the circuit court to order the justice court to send the record up.” Here, there was no misconduct of any officials. In fact, the record here does not indicate any effort by Abraham to secure the justice court record or to inform the justice court clerk of any obligation or duty to forward the record. Abraham’s petition for writ of certiorari contained a certificate of service that indicated that Abraham had mailed a copy of the petition only to the prosecutor. There was no indication that a copy of the petition was served or otherwise provided to the clerk of the justice court. The justice court was not responsible to provide the circuit court a copy of the record when there is no evidence that the justice court ever received notice of Abraham’s attempt to file an appeal of its judgment. Abraham argues that he could never have had first-hand knowledge of what proof was put on because he was tried in absentia. Had Abraham appeared and contested the traffic citations, he would have had first-hand knowledge of the evidence offered against him. Had Abraham appealed the justice court judgment, as provided under section 99-35-1, he would have had first-hand knowledge of the evidence offered against him. Abraham argues that his evidence was uncontradicted. Abraham bases this on the fact that the prosecutor was served a copy of the petition and the prosecutor made no effort to contradict his petition. The prosecutor’s silence should not be interpreted to mean that Abraham’s assertion about what he said is true. The circuit court did not abuse its discretion by failing to grant the petition for writ of certiorari based on Abraham’s account of broad statements made by the county prosecutor as to the prosecutor’s memory about in absentia traffic tickets in general. Abraham argues that his failure to put the justice court record before the circuit court was no reason to deny his petition for writ of certiorari. The real issue here is whether a person may be convicted in absentia in justice court based solely on the evidence of the traffic citation or ticket. Abraham acknowledges that section 99-17-9 authorizes a trial in absentia when the defendant is notified of the trial and fails to appear. Abraham failed to present the record and sufficient evidence before the circuit court to entitle him to the relief requested. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
