Hawthorne v. State
| Docket Number: | 2003-KA-02550-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 12-12-2006 Opinion Author: Irving, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Aggravated assault - Challenge for cause - Mistrial - Sufficiency of evidence - UCCCR 2.04 Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Southwick, Chandler, Griffis, Barnes, Ishee and Roberts, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 10-31-2003 Appealed from: SUNFLOWER COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: W. ASHLEY HINES Disposition: CONVICTED OF AGGRAVATED ASSAULT AND SENTENCED TO TWENTY YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS. District Attorney: JOYCE IVY CHILES Case Number: 2003-0147 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | William Hawthorne |
AELICIA L. THOMAS |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: JOHN R. HENRY |
|
|
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 - Challenge for cause - Mistrial - Sufficiency of evidence - UCCCR 2.04 |
| Summary of the Facts: | William Hawthorne was convicted of aggravated assault and was sentenced to twenty years. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Challenge for cause Hawthorne argues that the trial court erred in excusing a juror for cause after she stated that she could not sit in judgment of another person. Despite Hawthorne’s contention, the record reflects that she was excused because she adamantly stated that she would not be able to judge Hawthorne fairly, and that she could not vote to deprive a person of his liberty. In light of the statements made by the juror, the judge did not abuse his discretion in granting the State’s motion to excuse her for cause. Issue 2: Mistrial Hawthorne argues that the jury was tainted by the juror’s angry outburst. The juror’s comments were not directed toward Hawthorne, and it is clear that she simply did not wish to serve on the jury. Thus, the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in admonishing the jury and allowing the trial to proceed as scheduled. Issue 3: Sufficiency of evidence Hawthorne argues that the trial court erred in failing to grant his motion for a directed verdict; however, the record does not reflect that the trial court ruled on the motion. Pursuant to UCCCR 2.04, this issue is procedurally barred. In addition, the evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s verdict. The State produced four witnesses, in addition to the victim, all of whom testified that the victim did not have a knife, or any other weapon, at the time of the incident. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
