Hudderson v. State
| Docket Number: | 2005-KA-01806-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 10-31-2006 Opinion Author: Southwick, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Sale of cocaine - Continuance - Illegal sentence - Sufficiency of evidence Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Irving, Chandler, Griffis, Barnes, Ishee and Roberts, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 07-20-2005 Appealed from: Pearl River County Circuit Court Judge: R. I. Prichard, III Disposition: CONVICTED OF SALE OF COCAINE AND SENTENCED AS AN HABITUAL OFFENDER TO SIXTY YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS District Attorney: CLAIBORNE "BUDDY" MCDONALD Case Number: K-2005-195P |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Stephon Hudderson |
JOHN A. HOWELL |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: SCOTT STUART |
|
|
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: | Sale of cocaine - Continuance - Illegal sentence - Sufficiency of evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Stephon Hudderson was convicted for sale of cocaine. He was sentenced to sixty years imprisonment without possibility of parole. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Continuance Hudderson argues that the court erred by refusing to grant a continuance due to the unavailability of the confidential informant. Before there will be manifest injustice in the denial of a continuance, an accused must have suffered unfair surprise or prejudice. Here, the prosecution disclosed the identity and last known residence of the informant well before the scheduled trial. The trial court gave Hudderson the opportunity to accept a continuance, but he was satisfied to go to trial without the informant or police chief present. Thus, there was no abuse of the trial court’s discretion when it denied the continuance on the day of trial. Issue 2: Illegal sentence Hudderson argues that due to his age of forty-three at the time of his conviction, only a jury could impose a sentence of sixty years imprisonment without parole. However, the Supreme Court has distinguished sentences issued in drug cases from sentences for crimes that require a judge to impose a sentence reasonably expected to be less than life in the absence of a jury recommending a life sentence. Hudderson also argues that he is entitled to the benefit of proportionality analysis regarding his sentence. Sentences that do not exceed statutory limitations will generally be upheld. Hudderson received the maximum sentence allowed for sale of a controlled substance as a subsequent and habitual offender and the analysis for proportionality is not required. Issue 3: Sufficiency of evidence Hudderson argues that the evidence was not sufficient to support his guilt because of the gross errors committed by law enforcement. The evidence presented against Hudderson at trial included direct evidence by way of an audio-visual recording and testimony that Hudderson received money and handed the undercover officer cocaine in exchange for that money. This was sufficient evidence. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
