Baker v. State


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2009-KA-01194-COA
Linked Case(s): 2009-KA-01194-COA ; 2009-CT-01194-SCT

Court of Appeals: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 01-18-2011
Opinion Author: Lee, P.J.
Holding: Affirmed.

Additional Case Information: Topic: Felony child abuse - Admission of letters M.R.E. 403 - M.R.E. 404(b) - M.R.E. 401 - M.R.E. 402 - Mental state - Prior conviction - M.R.E. 609(a)(1) - Sufficiency of evidence
Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Myers, P.J., Irving, Griffis, Barnes, Ishee and Carlton, JJ. Roberts and Maxwell, JJ., concur in part and in the result without separate written opinion.
Procedural History: Jury Trial
Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 05-29-2009
Appealed from: Lowndes County Circuit Court
Judge: Lee J. Howard
Disposition: Convicted of Felony Child Abuse and Sentenced to Ten Years in the Custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections with Five Years' Post-Release Supervision and to Pay a $1,000 Fine
Case Number: CR2005-0408-CR1

  Party Name: Attorney Name:   Brief(s) Available:
Appellant: Scott Daniel Baker




WILLIAM C. STENNETT



 
  • Appellant #1 Brief

  • Appellee: State of Mississippi OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: LAURA HOGAN 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: Felony child abuse - Admission of letters M.R.E. 403 - M.R.E. 404(b) - M.R.E. 401 - M.R.E. 402 - Mental state - Prior conviction - M.R.E. 609(a)(1) - Sufficiency of evidence

    Summary of the Facts: Scott Baker was convicted of felony child abuse and was sentenced to ten years, with five years’ post-release supervision and ordered to pay a $1,000 fine. He appeals.

    Summary of Opinion Analysis: Issue 1: Admission of letters Baker argues that several letters written by him to the victim’s mother while he was in jail approximately a year prior to the incident in question should not have been allowed into evidence. The pertinent parts of these letters contained numerous statements that Baker, upon his return from the penitentiary, would discipline the children if they misbehaved or wet the bed. The trial court allowed the letters to be introduced pursuant to M.R.E. 403 and 404(b). Rule 404(b) allows evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts to show proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident. This evidence must also pass the test in Rule 403, whether the probative value of the evidence is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. Baker argues that the letters were written a year prior to the incident; thus, the letters were too remote in time to be relevant. In a similar situation, the Mississippi Supreme Court stated that even if the letters do not fall under Rule 404(b), the analysis is still essentially the same, since the letters could still be relevant under Rules 401 and 402 to show intent or motive. These letters written by Baker were relevant under Rule 401, and it was within the jury’s province to determine what weight to give them. Baker’s views on disciplining his children, however inflammatory or inarticulately put, offered an explanation for his actions. Furthermore, there was testimony that Baker had a violent temper and had difficulty exercising patience. Thus, the court did not err in finding the letters were more probative than prejudicial. Issue 2: Mental state Baker argues that the trial court erred by not allowing him to introduce evidence through witness testimony of his mental state at the time the letters were written. There was no abuse of discretion by the trial court in refusing to allow this particular testimony. None of the witnesses offered had personal knowledge of Baker’s state of mind at the time he wrote the letters. Issue 3: Prior conviction Baker argues that the trial court erred in admitting evidence of his prior felony conviction. The State wanted to use Baker’s accessory-after-the-fact conviction for impeachment purposes pursuant to M.R.E. 609(a)(1). A trial court should consider the following factors when ruling on the admissibility of prior convictions under Rule 609(a)(1): the impeachment value of the prior crime; the point in time of the conviction and the witness’s subsequent history; the similarity between the past crime and the charged crime; the importance of the defendant’s testimony; and the centrality of the credibility issue. Here, the trial court made an on-the-record determination regarding these factors. The trial court also ruled that the prior conviction would be admissible under Rule 403, finding that the prior conviction was not similar to the crime charged and a limiting instruction would be given to the jury. There was no abuse of discretion in the court’s ruling. Issue 4: Sufficiency of evidence Baker argues that the evidence was legally insufficient to support the verdict, because the State failed to prove that the child had suffered a serious bodily injury. The child’s doctor testified that although the child had no permanent injuries and did not suffer any fractures, the wounds she received were serious. The doctor noted significant bruising and swelling of the child’s face as well as a laceration on her cheek. She further testified that only multiple blows using great force could have caused the injuries. Thus, there was sufficient evidence for the jury to find that Baker had inflicted serious bodily harm to the victim.


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