Griffin v. State
| Docket Number: | 2004-KA-00567-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 01-03-2006 Opinion Author: Irving, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Sale of marihuana - Admission of videotape - M.R.E. 901(b)(1) - M.R.E. 1003 - Defective indictment - Sufficiency of indictment Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Chandler, Griffis, Barnes and Ishee, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 03-11-2004 Appealed from: Neshoba County Circuit Court Judge: Vernon Cotten Disposition: CONVICTED OF SALE OF LESS THAN ONE OUNCE OF MARIHUANA AND SENTENCED TO THREE YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND ORDERED TO PAY A $1,500 FINE District Attorney: Mark Sheldon Duncan Case Number: 03-CR-058-NS-G |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Michael Griffin a/k/a Glover |
EDMUND J. PHILLIPS |
||
| 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: | Sale of marihuana - Admission of videotape - M.R.E. 901(b)(1) - M.R.E. 1003 - Defective indictment - Sufficiency of indictment |
| Summary of the Facts: | Michael Griffin was convicted of the sale of less than one ounce of marihuana and was sentenced to three years. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Videotape Griffin argues that the court erred in admitting a duplicate VHS copy of the drug transaction without proper authentication. M.R.E. 901(b)(1) provides that authentication can be accomplished by testimony of a witness with knowledge that a matter is what it is claimed to be. The State satisfied the requirements for proper authentication through the testimony of a witness who was familiar with the particulars of the drug transaction and testified sufficiently to the accuracy of the recording. In addressing Griffin’s argument that the best evidence rule was violated, the duplicate VHS tape was properly authenticated and the State gave a logical reason for presenting the duplicate. Griffin had prior knowledge of the existence of the tape, and the proceedings were recessed to allow him to view the duplicate. Under these facts, the judge properly admitted the duplicate under M.R.E. 1003. Issue 2: Defective indictment Griffin argues that there was a fatal variance between his indictment and the proof at trial because there was no testimony identifying the person named in the indictment as the purchaser [confidential informant #CI-294-02] and the person proven at trial to be the purchaser [Memory Hunter] as the same person. There is overwhelming evidence that Hunter was the person who purchased the marihuana from Griffin; therefore, it stands to reason that Hunter was confidential informant #CI-294-02. Issue 3: Sufficiency of indictment Griffin argues that his indictment was insufficient because it failed to identify with specificity the person to whom he was alleged to have sold marihuana. A thorough review of the record reveals that Griffin did not object to the contents of the indictment at the trial level, and thus is barred from raising this issue on appeal. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
