Williams v. State


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2004-KA-02348-SCT
Linked Case(s): 2004-KA-02348-SCT

Supreme Court: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 01-05-2006
Opinion Author: Smith, C.J.
Holding: Affirmed

Additional Case Information: Topic: Armed robbery - Sufficiency of evidence - Voir dire
Judge(s) Concurring: Waller, P.J., Easley, Carlson, Dickinson and Randolph, JJ.
Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz, J.
Concurs in Result Only: Cobb, P.J., and Graves, J.
Procedural History: Jury Trial
Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 11-12-2004
Appealed from: Grenada County Circuit Court
Judge: Clarence E. Morgan, III
Disposition: Williams was convicted of armed robbery and sentenced to serve twenty-years without the possibility of probation or parole.
District Attorney: Doug Evans
Case Number: 2004-017CR

  Party Name: Attorney Name:  
Appellant: Willie Hutchinson Williams




ROBERT T. LASTER, JR., PHILLIP BROADHEAD



 

Appellee: State of Mississippi OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: W. GLENN WATTS  

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: Armed robbery - Sufficiency of evidence - Voir dire

Summary of the Facts: Willie Williams was convicted of armed robbery and sentenced to twenty years without the possibility of probation or parole. He appeals.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: Issue 1: Sufficiency of evidence Williams argues that the evidence presented by the State does not sustain a finding that he committed armed robbery because the evidence presented at trial was weak, inconsistent, and not credible. There is a wealth of evidence in the record to support Williams’ armed robbery conviction. The clerk identified Willie Williams as the man who entered the GNC and held a knife to her neck. In addition, concealed money was discovered in Williams’ bed, Williams denied having any money, a job or other source of income, Williams was sweaty when officers arrived at his apartment, and Williams was in the process of changing his appearance by cutting his own hair, at a time he knew the police were looking for him. Issue 2: Voir dire Williams argues that a reasonable inference can be made that he was prejudiced as result of a juror’s failure to disclose that a member of her family had been the victim of a crime. The question propounded to the juror was relevant to the voir dire examination, unambiguous, and the juror had substantial knowledge of the information sought. However, there is no reasonable inference of prejudice. The facts are overwhelmingly in favor of the verdict returned by the jury. Moreover, no reasonable juror could have reached a contrary verdict in the case.


Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court