Allen v. State
| Docket Number: | 2004-KA-00906-COA Linked Case(s): 2004-KA-00906-COA ; 2004-CT-00906-SCT |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 10-03-2006 Opinion Author: Griffis, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Sexual battery - Statute of limitations - Section 99-1-5 - Section 97-3-95 Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Irving, Chandler, Barnes, Ishee and Roberts, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Southwick, J. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 04-21-2004 Appealed from: George County Circuit Court Judge: Dale Harkey Disposition: CONVICTED OF SEXUAL BATTERY AND SENTENCED TO SERVE A TERM OF TWENTY-FIVE YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS. District Attorney: ANTHONY LAWRENCE, III Case Number: 2003-10,026(3) |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Gary Dewayne Allen a/k/a Gary Wayne Allen |
THOMAS M. MATTHEWS, JR.,
THOMAS M. MATTHEWS, III |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: DEIRDRE MCCRORY |
|
|
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: | Sexual battery - Statute of limitations - Section 99-1-5 - Section 97-3-95 |
| Summary of the Facts: | Gary Allen was convicted of sexual battery and sentenced to twenty-five years. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Allen argues that the statute of limitations, section 99-1-5, expired prior to the indictment and barred his prosecution. Allen begins with the amended indictment, which alleged that the crime occurred “between July 31, 2000 and November 1, 2000.” He then argues that the prosecution began on December 4, 2002, with the issuance of a warrant. Thus, he claims that the prosecution began more than two years after the date of the crime. The history of section 97-3-95 indicates that the Legislature enacted the present statutory structure in 1993. Prior to that legislative amendment, section 97-3-95 read that “a person is guilty of sexual battery if he or she engages in sexual penetration with: (a) Another person without his or her consent; (b) A mentally defective, mentally incapacitated or physically helpless person; (c) A child under the age of fourteen (14) years.” There is no doubt that Section 99-1-5 excluded from the statute of limitations the crime under Section 97-3-95(c), i.e. sexual battery with a child under the age of fourteen years. The child in this case was born on November 30, 1986. The amended indictment alleges that the offense occurred “between July 31, 2000 and November 1, 2000.” Thus, at the time of the alleged offense, the child was younger than fourteen years of age. Therefore, section 97-3-95 excluded from the operation of the statute of limitations the crime of sexual battery that was allegedly committed against the child, and the trial court correctly decided that the charge against Allen was not barred by the statute of limitations. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
