Smith v. State
| Docket Number: | 2005-KA-00305-COA Linked Case(s): 2005-KA-00305-COA |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 08-15-2006 Opinion Author: Barnes, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Manslaughter - Sufficiency of evidence - Prosecutorial misconduct Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Southwick, Irving, Chandler, Griffis, Ishee and Roberts, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 11-01-2004 Appealed from: Tallahatchie County Circuit Court Judge: Ann H. Lamar Disposition: CONVICTED OF MANSLAUGHTER AND SENTENCED TO TWENTY YEARS WITHOUT PAROLE IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS District Attorney: JOHN W. CHAMPION Case Number: 2003-16-LT2 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Walter Smith, Jr. a/k/a Walter Glenn Smith |
JOHNNIE E. WALLS |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: JOSE BENJAMIN SIMO |
|
|
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: | Manslaughter - Sufficiency of evidence - Prosecutorial misconduct |
| Summary of the Facts: | Walter Smith was convicted of manslaughter and was sentenced to twenty years without the possibility of parole. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Sufficiency of evidence Smith argues that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict. The evidence was conclusive and undisputed that the victim was killed by the use of a dangerous weapon, a pistol. Also, both the State and the defense presented evidence that an argument took place before the shooting occurred, which would support the element of “in the heat of passion.” Although Smith argues that he shot the victim in self-defense, the evidence is sufficient to show that Smith’s actions were not in necessary self-defense. No gun was found on the victim, and no jacket was found on the victim which would confirm Smith’s statement that he shot the victim when he reached into his jacket. There was also the admission by Smith that he shot the victim merely because he did not want to “tussle” when an argument broke out between the two. Also, there is substantial evidence that Smith and his girlfriend attempted to cover up the shooting. Issue 2: Prosecutorial misconduct During its closing argument, the prosecution placed on an overhead projector a piece of paper which contained a quote from the defendant that he had shot the victim because he did not want to fight with him. Smith argues that the document should not have been viewed by the jury because it was not in evidence and that the statement was prejudicial and inflammatory because only part of the statement was revealed to the jury. Although the piece of paper observed by the jury was not in evidence, the statement it contained was a statement made by the defendant which was in evidence. The statement was only visible on the overhead projector for a few seconds. Although the prosecution only used part of the defendant’s statement, Smith neglects to point out that his counsel only used part of the statement during closing arguments as well. Thus, the judge was within his discretion to deny the motion. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
