Boyda v. State
| Docket Number: | 2009-KA-01891-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 03-01-2011 Opinion Author: Maxwell, J. Holding: Affirmed. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Murder - Weight of evidence - Limiting testimony - Lay testimony - Relevant evidence - Exclusion of expert's resume Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee, P.J., Myers, P.J., Irving, Griffis, Barnes, Ishee, Roberts and Carlton, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-10-2009 Appealed from: Stone County Circuit Court Judge: Lawrence Paul Bourgeois, Jr. Disposition: Convicted of Murder and Sentenced to Life in the Custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections District Attorney: Cono A. Caranna, II Case Number: B6601-2005-0090 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Keith Boyda |
W. DANIEL HINCHCLIFF, LESLIE S. LEE |
|
|
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: LADONNA C. HOLLAND | ||
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: | Murder - Weight of evidence - Limiting testimony - Lay testimony - Relevant evidence - Exclusion of expert's resume |
| Summary of the Facts: | Keith Boyda was convicted of murder. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Weight of evidence Boyda argues the verdict cannot stand because the weight of the evidence supports that Boyda was M’Naghten insane. To establish a defense on the ground of insanity, it must be clearly proved that at the time of committing of the act the accused was laboring under such defect of reason from disease of the mind as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing, or if he did know it, that he did not know that what he was doing was wrong. When there is testimony on both sides of the issue of the defendant’s sanity, a jury’s verdict on that issue is essentially conclusive and unreviewable. In this case, the defense offered two experts and the prosecution offered two experts on the issue of Boyda’s insanity. The jury was free to reasonably infer that by arming himself with a rifle, leaving the scene, and making several stops, Boyda was conscious of his guilt and was fleeing from the scene. Boyda apologized to his daughter for “everything,” and he refused to let her, the only eyewitness to the crime, leave, even after she requested to do so. Given the expert testimony and circumstantial evidence supporting Boyda’s legal sanity, it was reasonable for the jury to find Boyda guilty of murder. Issue 2: Evidentiary rulings Boyda argues that the circuit court erred in limiting the testimony of his brother pertaining to Boyda’s behavior after the shooting. Some of the testimony concerns behavior that occurred over four years after the shooting. The ground on which Boyda wished to admit the disputed evidence was rendered moot by the jury’s guilty verdict. Because his new argument that the evidence is relevant to his sanity at the time of the offense was not before the trial court, it is procedurally barred. Additionally, his brother, as a lay witness, was precluded from stating an opinion as to Boyda’s sanity at the time he killed his wife based upon Boyda’s post shooting behavior. Boyda also argues that he was prejudiced by the State asking irrelevant questions about an expert witness not being licensed to practice in Mississippi. However, Boyda’s trial counsel did not object to this line of questioning at trial nor did Boyda raise this issue in his motion for a new trial. Boyda argues that the circuit court erred by excluding the expert’s resume. Because Boyda was given ample opportunity to, and did, bolster the expert’s qualifications through questioning, there is no error in the exclusion of her resume. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
