Brown v. State
| Docket Number: | 2004-KA-01008-SCT | |
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 07-21-2005 Opinion Author: Carlson, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Possession of cocaine - Sufficiency of evidence - Prosecutorial conduct - Closing argument Judge(s) Concurring: Smith, C.J., Waller and Cobb, P.JJ., Easley, Dickinson and Randolph, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz, J. Concurs in Result Only: Graves, J. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 06-09-2004 Appealed from: Hinds County Circuit Court Judge: Bobby DeLaughter Disposition: Convicted of possession of cocaine of more than .1 gram but less than 2 grams and sentenced to eight years. District Attorney: Eleanor Faye Peterson Case Number: 02-1-264 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Tony Ray Brown a/k/a Tommy Ray Brown |
JULIE ANN EPPS, E. MICHAEL MARKS |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: JEAN SMITH VAUGHAN |
|
|
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 cocaine - Sufficiency of evidence - Prosecutorial conduct - Closing argument |
| Summary of the Facts: | Tony Brown was convicted of possession of cocaine in an amount of more than 0.1 gram but less than 2 grams and was sentenced to eight years. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Sufficiency of evidence Brown argues that the evidence is insufficient. He argues that his uncontradicted testimony concerning a fight with his crack dealer and his wife and that they must have placed the cocaine in Brown’s hands after rendering him unconscious must be accepted as true. However, the investigator testified that Brown reached into his pocket and pulled out the cocaine, which Brown unequivocally denied. View the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, there was sufficient evidence upon which a rational person could have found that the State proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Brown committed all of the elements of possession of cocaine. Issue 2: Prosecutorial conduct Brown argues that the State misled the jury as to the elements of possession of cocaine in its closing argument. Not only did Brown make no objection to the prosecutor’s remarks at trial, but based on the existing evidence before the jury at the time the jury heard closing arguments from the attorneys, the comments of the prosecutor were not improper. Issue 3: Closing argument Brown argues that the court erred in prohibiting a portion of his defense counsel’s closing argument. The trial judge was well within his discretion in limiting the closing argument to the matters in evidence. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
