Anderson. v. State


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2003-KA-02019-SCT
Linked Case(s): 2003-KA-02019-SCT

Supreme Court: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 11-18-2004
Opinion Author: Randolph, J.
Holding: Affirmed

Additional Case Information: Topic: Sale of marijuana - Alibi instruction - Sufficiency of evidence - Chain of custody - M.R.E. 901(a) - Ineffective assistance of counsel
Judge(s) Concurring: Smith, C.J., Waller and Cobb, P.JJ., Easley, Carlson and Dickinson, JJ.
Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz and Graves, JJ.
Procedural History: Jury Trial
Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 09-08-2003
Appealed from: Leake County Circuit Court
Judge: Marcus D. Gordon
Disposition: Convicted of selling less than one ounce of marijuana and sentenced to 3 years.
Case Number: 03-CR-042-LE-G

  Party Name: Attorney Name:  
Appellant: Richard N. Anderson, Jr. a/k/a Richard Netrail Anderson, Jr.








 

Appellee: State of Mississippi  

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 marijuana - Alibi instruction - Sufficiency of evidence - Chain of custody - M.R.E. 901(a) - Ineffective assistance of counsel

Summary of the Facts: Richard Anderson, Jr., was convicted of the sale of marijuana and sentenced to three years. He appeals.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: Issue 1: Alibi instruction Anderson argues that he was entitled to an alibi instruction even though he failed to request one. Anderson is procedurally barred from raising this issue for the first time on appeal. Issue 2: Sufficiency of evidence Anderson argues that the evidence was insufficient. The confidential informant, who had known Anderson since childhood and even lived in his home for some periods of time, identified Anderson as the person who sold the marijuana to the agent. The agent also identified Anderson as the individual who sold the marijuana to him. When the evidence presented by the State is taken together with all reasonable inference, there is an abundance of sufficient credible evidence. Issue 3: Chain of custody Anderson argues that the marijuana should not have been admitted into evidence, because there was inadequate testimony regarding who delivered or returned the marijuana from testing. This issue is procedurally barred since Anderson failed to object to the admission of the marijuana into evidence. M.R.E. 901(a) requires the proponent to produce evidence sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what its proponents claim. The record shows that the alleged marijuana was properly identified as being the same substance that the agent purchased from Anderson. In addition, there is no evidence of any indication or reasonable inference that the evidence was tampered with or substituted. Issue 4: Ineffective assistance of counsel Anderson argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel, because his attorney failed to object to hearsay testimony and leading questions. While the agent testified to hearing a conversation over a transmitter concealed on the undercover agent, he identified only the voices of another agent and the confidential informant. He did not attempt to identify Anderson’s voice and did not testify as to the actual words used in the conversation. With regard to leading questions, leading questions will rarely create so distorted an evidentiary presentation as to deny the defendant a fair trial. Here, Anderson suffered no prejudice.


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