Pittman v. State
| Docket Number: | 2009-KA-00929-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 02-01-2011 Opinion Author: Irving, J. Holding: Affirmed. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Aggravated assault - Leading question - Admission of testimony Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Griffis, Ishee, Roberts, Carlton and Maxwell, JJ. Concur in Part, Concur in Result 1: Barnes, J., without separate written opinion Procedural History: Admin or Agency Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - WORKERS' COMPENSATION |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 05-07-2009 Appealed from: Leake County Circuit Court Judge: MARCUS D. GORDON Disposition: MOTION TO REOPEN TIME FOR APPEAL DENIED AND APPEAL OF COMMISSION’S DECISION DISMISSED Case Number: 09-CR-006-LE-G |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Delynn Delshae Pittman |
EDMUND J. PHILLIPS JR., JAMES E. SMITH JR. |
|
|
| 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: | Aggravated assault - Leading question - Admission of testimony |
| Summary of the Facts: | Delynn Pittman was convicted of aggravated assault and was sentenced to eight years, with four years suspended and five years of post-release supervision. Pittman appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Leading question Pittman argues that the circuit court erred in overruling his objection to the prosecutor’s question to a witness. Although leading questions may be improper on direct examination, trial courts are given great discretion in permitting the use of such questions, and the decision will not be reversed unless there has been a manifest abuse of discretion resulting in injury to the complaining party. In this case, the question does not necessarily suggest a certain response. Even if the question were leading, there is no reason to reverse the circuit court’s judgment on this ground. The answer that the State was attempting to elicit had already been testified to by another witness. Therefore, any error flowing from the question was harmless at worst. Issue 2: Admission of testimony Pittman argues that an officer improperly offered expert testimony that Pittman’s body language indicated a “confession slump,” even though the officer was never offered as an expert. While the officer was not offered as an expert, Pittman’s attorney questioned the officer about his training. The officer explained that he had been trained in observing and identifying body language. Pittman did not seek to further voir dire the officer. Therefore, there was no error in allowing the testimony. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
