Knight v. State
| Docket Number: | 2010-KA-00770-SCT Linked Case(s): 2010-KA-00770-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 09-08-2011 Opinion Author: King, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Possession of controlled substance with intent to distribute while in possession of firearm - Ineffective assistance of counsel - M.R.A.P. 22(b) - Sufficiency of evidence Judge(s) Concurring: Waller, C.J., Carlson and Dickinson, P.JJ., Randolph, Kitchens, Chandler and Pierce, JJ. Concur in Part, Concur in Result 1: Lamar, J., Concurs in Part and in Result Without Separate Written Opinion Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 04-23-2010 Appealed from: Pearl River County Circuit Court Judge: R. I. Prichard, III Disposition: Appellant was convicted of possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute while in possession of a firearm. District Attorney: Haldon J. Kittrell Case Number: K2008-146P |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Kenneth Knight |
PHILLIP BROADHEAD
OFFICE OF INDIGENT APPEALS: LESLIE S. LEE |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: LISA LYNN BLOUNT 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: | Possession of controlled substance with intent to distribute while in possession of firearm - Ineffective assistance of counsel - M.R.A.P. 22(b) - Sufficiency of evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Kenneth Knight was convicted of possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute while in possession of a firearm. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Ineffective assistance of counsel Knight argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because his trial counsel failed to investigate whether probable cause existed for the search warrant, failed to request a suppression hearing, and stipulated to the sufficiency of the search warrant. M.R.A.P. 22(b) provides that issues which may be raised in post-conviction proceedings may also be raised on direct appeal if such issues are based on facts fully apparent from the record. In this case, the record is not sufficient to address Knight’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. When a defendant attacks a search warrant on the grounds that there was not sufficient probable cause for its issuance, the reviewing court must determine whether the magistrate’s decision was supported by substantial evidence. Knight makes bare assertions with no supporting evidence. Perhaps there is evidence outside the record that would assist the Court in reviewing Knight’s claim. Thus, Knight’s ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim is dismissed without prejudice so that he may raise his claim in a properly filed motion for post-conviction relief, if he so chooses. Issue 2: Sufficiency of evidence Knight argues that the State failed to prove that he had sole, constructive possession of the contraband. The prosecution’s theory of the case was that Knight was in constructive possession of crack cocaine, profits from drug sales, and a sawed-off shotgun that were found underneath the cushions of his couch. Knight maintains that the State’s circumstantial evidence is insufficient to prove that he had knowing and constructive possession of the items. Constructive possession may be established where the evidence, considered under the totality of the circumstances, shows that the defendant knowingly exercised control over the contraband. The defendant’s proximity to the drugs is a factor in establishing constructive possession, but it is not determinative. Other incriminating circumstances must be present to establish constructive possession. A co-defendant’s testimony established that Knight sold drugs from his home. Another co-defendant’s testimony put Knight at the spot where the police lieutenant found the hidden contraband. Moreover, Knight’s admission to the lieutenant that the money belonged to him could lead a reasonable juror to believe that Knight knew that the contraband was stashed in the couch and that it also belonged to him. Viewing this evidence in the light most favorable to the State, there is sufficient evidence to convict Knight of possession of cocaine with intent to distribute while in possession of a firearm. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
