Pinkston v. State
| Docket Number: | 2009-KA-01665-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 12-14-2010 Opinion Author: Griffis, J. Holding: Affirmed. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Armed robbery - Admission of statement - Photographs - Weight of evidence Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee, P.J., Irving, Barnes, Ishee, Roberts, Carlton and Maxwell, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Myers, P.J. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 05-13-2009 Appealed from: Hinds County Circuit Court Judge: W. Swan Yerger Disposition: CONVICTED OF ARMED ROBBERY AND SENTENCED TO THIRTY-FIVE YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS District Attorney: ROBERT SHULER SMITH Case Number: 08-1-088 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Chaz Pinkston |
GEORGE T. HOLMES |
|
|
| 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: | Armed robbery - Admission of statement - Photographs - Weight of evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Chaz Pinkston was convicted of armed robbery and sentenced to thirty-five years. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Admission of statement Pinkston argues that the court erred in finding that Pinkston knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his Miranda rights and made the incriminating statements. The State meets its burden of proving voluntariness of a statement by presenting the testimony of a witness with personal knowledge – which will usually be a police officer who was present when the confession was made – that the confession was voluntarily given, without any coercion, threats, or offers of reward. Here, the circuit court applied the correct legal standard, and its finding was supported by the evidence. At a pretrial hearing, the State presented testimony from two officers who were present during the confession. Their testimonies were that, at the outset of the interrogation, they read Pinkston his Miranda rights, and he signed a waiver of those rights. He proceeded to handwrite a confession, and then he participated in an oral question-and-answer session that was typed out by one of the officers and then signed by Pinkston. There was no coercion, intimidation, or improper promises. Issue 2: Photographs At trial, the State introduced six photographs, five of the exterior and interior of the bank and one of Pinkston’s Mercury Cougar. In addition, the bank’s surveillance video was played to the jury. He claimed that the morning of trial was the first time he had seen the photographs. As for the surveillance video, he claimed the State did not give him a copy of the video until the morning of trial, although he conceded the video was shown to him approximately two months earlier prior to the suppression hearing. Pinkston argues that this amounted to trial by ambush. Failure to request a continuance constitutes a waiver of the discovery violation. Pinkston did not seek a continuance or a mistrial. Therefore, this issue is procedurally barred. Issue 3: Weight of evidence Pinkston argues that he is entitled to a new trial because the jury’s verdict is against the overwhelming weight of the evidence. At trial, the State presented the eyewitness testimony of Jackson, who unequivocally stated that Pinkston was one of the robbers. In addition, the bank’s surveillance video was submitted to the jury. Also, Pinkston’s confession was before the jury. Thus, this issue is without merit. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
