Mapp v. State
| Docket Number: | 2002-KA-00105-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 04-22-2003 Opinion Author: Lee, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Rape - M.R.E. 803(2) - Excited utterance exception - Admission of confession - Weight of evidence Judge(s) Concurring: McMillin, C.J., King, P.J., Bridges, Thomas, Irving, Myers and Griffis, JJ. Concurs in Result Only: Southwick, P.J., and Chandler, J. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 01-17-2002 Appealed from: Leake County Circuit Court Judge: Marcus D. Gordon Disposition: APPELLANT CONVICTED OF RAPE AND SENTENCED TO TWENTY-FIVE YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS. District Attorney: Ken Turner Case Number: 01-CR-068-LE G |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Hartie Mapp |
EDMUND J. PHILLIPS, JR. |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: 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: | Rape - M.R.E. 803(2) - Excited utterance exception - Admission of confession - Weight of evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Hartie Mapp was convicted of rape and sentenced to serve twenty-five years in jail. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Hearsay Mapp argues that the court erred in allowing a deputy to testify concerning his visit with the victim at the hospital, because the testimony was inadmissible hearsay under M.R.E. 802. M.R.E. 803(2) provides that a statement relating to a startling event or condition made while the declarant was under the stress of excitement caused by the event or condition is admissible. Here, the victim testified that, immediately after the incident, she drove herself to the hospital and that she shortly thereafter told the officer what had happened. Because the victim was clearly still under the stress of the situation, her statement to the deputy qualifies as an excited utterance. Issue 2: Confession Mapp argues that his oral confession should not have been admitted because it described an incident of consensual sexual intercourse and he was not afforded a hearing concerning the statement’s admissibility. Although Mapp made a second statement which he signed, it did not act to cancel out the prior oral statement. In addition, two witnesses who were present when Mapp made both statements testified that Mapp was read his Miranda rights and that he was not promised leniency nor was he threatened. Therefore, the court did not err in admitting the statement. Issue 3: Weight of evidence Mapp argues that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence, because the intercourse was consensual. While both the victim and Mapp admit they had sex, whether or not the victim consented is a question the jury was left to decide. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
