Guerrero v. State
| Docket Number: | 2005-KA-01971-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 12-05-2006 Opinion Author: Myers, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Feloniously and purposefully causing serious bodily harm - Identification testimony - Weight of evidence Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee, P.J., Southwick, Irving, Chandler, Griffis, Barnes, Ishee and Roberts, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-13-2005 Appealed from: ATTALA COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: CLARENCE E. MORGAN, III Disposition: CONVICTION OF AGGRAVATED ASSAULT AND SENTENCED TO SERVE A TERM OF FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS. District Attorney: DOUG EVANS Case Number: 04-0066-CR |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Jose Luis Rivera Guerrero a/k/a Jose Louis Reivera Gurrero |
RAYMOND M. BAUM |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: DESHUN T. MARTIN |
|
|
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: | Feloniously and purposefully causing serious bodily harm - Identification testimony - Weight of evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Jose Guerrero was convicted of feloniously and purposefully caused serious bodily harm to another man. He was sentenced to fifteen years. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Identification testimony Guerrero argues that an eyewitness’s identification at the jail constituted a single-person show-up under suggestive circumstances, and is thus tainted. Formal, arranged single-person show-ups in which the police purposely cause a victim to be confronted with a single individual bearing some general resemblance to the description offered by the victim are not favored in the law. However, the fact of an identification based on a single person show-up is not, of itself, a basis to exclude evidence of the identification. Rather, the issue is whether, based on a totality of the circumstances, the show-up was so unnecessarily suggestive and conducive to irreparable mistaken identification that it amounted to a deprivation of due process. Here, it appears that the encounter between the eyewitness and Guerrero at the jail was mere happenstance. In addition, the witness’s identification of Guerrero was not made under such unnecessarily suggestive circumstances as to destroy the probative value of her identification. The witness testified at the suppression hearing that she had observed the shooter from a distance of less than five feet, that she saw the gun and the second of the two shots fired, that her full attention was on the shooter, and that she was “one-hundred percent” certain that Guerrero was the shooter when she identified him at the jail. Furthermore, Guerrero accurately matched the description of the shooter the witness gave to the sheriff on the night of the shooting, and less than twenty-four hours had elapsed between the shooting and the identification. Issue 2: Weight of evidence Guerrero argues that the verdict was contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence. However, there was ample evidence proving that Guerrero shot the victim. An eyewitness and the victim identified Guerrero as the shooter, and all three witnesses called by the defense to rebut that assertion admit to being unable to see the shooter from their vantage points. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
