Ransom v. State
| Docket Number: | 2002-CT-00267-SCT Linked Case(s): 2002-CT-00267-SCT ; 2002-CT-00267-SCT ; 2002-KA-00267-COA |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 09-22-2005 Opinion Author: Easley, J. Holding: THE JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF APPEALS IS REVERSED, AND THE JUDGMENT OF THE HINDS COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT IS AFFIRMED |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Strong-arm robbery - Ineffective assistance of counsel Judge(s) Concurring: Smith, C.J., Waller, P.J., and Carlson, J. Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz, J. Dissenting Author : Dickinson, J. Dissent Joined By : Graves and Randolph, JJ. Concurs in Result Only: Cobb, P.J. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY Writ of Certiorari: Granted Appealed from Court of Appeals |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 08-15-2000 Appealed from: Hinds County Circuit Court Judge: L. Breland Hilburn Disposition: STRONG ARM ROBBERY - SENTENCED TO SERVE A TERM OF FIFTEEN YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF MDOC. District Attorney: Eleanor Faye Peterson Case Number: 98-4-017 |
|
| Note: | The Court reversed the Court of Appeals judgment and affirmed the judgment of the circuit court. See the original COA opinion at http://www.mssc.state.ms.us/Images/Opinions/CO21556.pdf | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Melvin Darnell Ransom |
PRO SE, W. E. GORE, JR. |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: SCOTT STUART |
|
|
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: | Strong-arm robbery - Ineffective assistance of counsel |
| Summary of the Facts: | Melvin Ransom was convicted of strong-arm robbery and sentenced to fifteen years. He appealed, and the Court of Appeals found that trial counsel was ineffective when it failed to investigate alibi testimony and to timely disclose a list of the alibi witnesses. The State filed a petition for writ of certiorari which the Supreme Court granted. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | The State argues that on direct appeal, the reviewing court must find that the record supports a finding that the trial counsel was so ineffective that the trial judge had a duty to declare a mistrial sua sponte. However, any defendant convicted of a crime may raise the issue of ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal, even though the matter has not first been presented to the trial court. Although the actions of Ransom’s counsel were not error-free, the error of untimely witness disclosure was not so egregious as to undermine the confidence in the outcome. Confidence in the outcome is not undermined, because the disallowed alibi testimony is very weak, unpersuasive given the strength of the opposing evidence, and even contradictory. In addition, the evidence against Ransom is very persuasive. Therefore, the Court of Appeals erroneously determined that the disallowed witnesses’ testimonies would likely have made a difference in the result of the trial. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
