Sullivan v. State
| Docket Number: | 2010-KA-00012-COA Linked Case(s): 2010-KA-00012-COA |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 04-12-2011 Opinion Author: Lee, C.J. Holding: Affirmed. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Murder - Motion to suppress - Weight of evidence Judge(s) Concurring: rving and Griffis, P.JJ., Myers, Barnes, Ishee, Roberts, Carlton and Maxwell, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-18-2009 Appealed from: Jefferson Davis County Circuit Court Judge: Prentiss Harrell Disposition: Convicted of Murder and Sentenced to Life in the Custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections District Attorney: Haldon J. Kittrell Case Number: K2007-041H |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Brandon Charles Sullivan |
LESLIE S. LEE |
||
| 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: | Murder - Motion to suppress - Weight of evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Brandon Sullivan was convicted of murder and was sentenced to life. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Motion to suppress Sullivan argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress his statements to the authorities, because he was coerced and threatened into confessing to the murder. When ruling on the admissibility of a confession, the trial court must determine, based on the totality of the circumstances, whether the confession was voluntarily and knowingly given and whether the defendant was given his Miranda rights. Two officers testified about Sullivan’s interrogation during the hearing on Sullivan’s motion to suppress. One of the officers testified that Sullivan appeared disheveled but was coherent and did not appear to be under the influence of alcohol or narcotics. In regard to Sullivan waiving his Miranda rights, the officer thought that Sullivan appeared to understand the questions and answered them coherently. When advised of his right to an attorney, Sullivan responded that he did not need an attorney. At no point during either interrogation did Sullivan invoke his right to remain silent. The officer did not promise Sullivan anything in return for confessing; he did not threaten Sullivan; and Sullivan never asked to stop the interrogation. The other officer corroborated this testimony. The State met its burden to prove that Sullivan’s confession was voluntary, and Sullivan failed to produce any evidence, through testimony or otherwise, that his confession was coerced. Issue 2: Weight of evidence Sullivan argues that the verdict is against the overwhelming weight of the evidence, because the State failed to admit competent evidence that proved he had committed the crime. Sullivan argues that without his confession, the State’s evidence was circumstantial. However, Sullivan’s confession was properly admitted. In addition to Sullivan’s confession, there was corroborating evidence, namely the bloody overalls found in Sullivan’s house. The blood spatter found on those overalls matched the victim’s blood sample. Sullivan was also seen in the vicinity of the victim’s house prior to her murder. Thus, allowing Sullivan’s conviction to stand would not sanction an unconscionable injustice. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
