Edwards v. State
| Docket Number: | 2010-KA-00718-COA Linked Case(s): 2010-KA-00718-COA |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 11-08-2011 Opinion Author: Maxwell, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Possession of oxycodone and acetaminophen - Habitual offender hearing - URCCC 11.03 - Disproportionate sentence - Section 41-29-139(c)(1)(E) - Section 99-19-83 Judge(s) Concurring: Lee, C.J., Irving and Griffis, P.JJ., Ishee, Roberts, Carlton and Russell, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Myers, J. Concur in Part, Concur in Result 1: Barnes, J. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 02-24-2010 Appealed from: Perry County Circuit Court Judge: Robert Helfrich Disposition: CONVICTED OF POSSESSION OF MORE THAN FORTY DOSAGE UNITS OF OXYCODONE AND ACETAMINOPHEN, A SCHEDULE II CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE, AND SENTENCED AS A HABITUAL OFFENDER TO LIFE IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS WITHOUT ELIGIBILITY FOR PAROLE OR PROBATION District Attorney: Jon Mark Weathers Case Number: 5453 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Donald Mark Edwards |
GEORGE S. SHADDOCK |
||
| 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: | Possession of oxycodone and acetaminophen - Habitual offender hearing - URCCC 11.03 - Disproportionate sentence - Section 41-29-139(c)(1)(E) - Section 99-19-83 |
| Summary of the Facts: | Donald Edwards was convicted of possession of oxycodone and acetaminophen. He was sentenced to life imprisonment without eligibility for parole or probation. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Habitual offender hearing Edwards argues that his habitual-offender status hearing was not truly separate because the jury had not been officially dismissed by the court. But the record shows, after the jury announced its verdict, the circuit judge instructed the jury to leave the courtroom. He then proceeded to consider Edwards’s previous felonies “without a jury.” The circuit judge’s actions not only fulfilled the letter of URCCC 11.03’s separate-hearing requirement but also its purpose—to keep the jury from hearing evidence of the previous felonies, so as not to influence its verdict on the present charge. Edwards’s indictment gave notice of the State’s intent to seek an enhanced sentence and listed the predicate felonies it intended to prove. And during sentencing, the State established through the pen packs that Edwards had served separate sentences of over a year imprisonment on at least three different felonies. The circuit judge’s separate consideration of the qualifying felonies was proper. Issue 2: Disproportionate sentence Edwards argues his life sentence was grossly disproportionate to his crime. Edwards raises the question of disproportionality only in terms of his possession conviction. He suggests his life sentence is unduly harsh because the controlled-substance possession statute he violated, section 41-29-139(c)(1)(E), carries a statutory penalty of ten to thirty years’ imprisonment for the type and amount of drugs he possessed; and he has no prior drug convictions. But the circuit judge sentenced Edwards under section 99-19-83, not section 41-29-139. This statute mandates a life sentence if the statutory requirements have been met irrespective of the statutory penalty for the present felony. There is no evidence in the record of improper motives in applying section 99-19-83. Edwards neither challenges the qualifying nature of any of the charged predicate offenses, nor does he otherwise contest he met the statute’s criteria. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
