Jacobs v. State
| Docket Number: | 2002-KA-01163-SCT | |
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 04-22-2004 Opinion Author: Graves, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Capital murder - Continuance - Suppression of videotaped statement - Hearsay - Lessor included offense instruction Judge(s) Concurring: Smith, C.J., Waller, P.J., Easley and Dickinson, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz, J. Concur in Part, Dissent in Part 1: Cobb, P.J., Concurs in Part and Dissents in Part Without Separate Written Opinion Concurs in Result Only: Carlson, J. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 07-20-2001 Appealed from: Jackson County Circuit Court Judge: Dale Harkey Disposition: Appellant was found guilty of capital murder and sentenced to life in prison. District Attorney: Keith Miller Case Number: 00-10,061(2)(3) |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Richard Jackson Jacobs |
JIM DAVIS |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: JEFFREY A. KLINGFUSS |
|
|
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: | Capital murder - Continuance - Suppression of videotaped statement - Hearsay - Lessor included offense instruction |
| Summary of the Facts: | Richard Jacobs was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to life imprisonment without parole. Jacobs appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Continuance Jacobs argues that the court erred in denying a continuance which defense counsel requested because the videotape of Jacobs’ statement was inaudible. A denial of a motion for continuance will be reversed only when manifest injustice appears to have resulted. Here, the judge did not abuse his discretion because he listened to the tape and determined it to be audible. In addition, the judge allowed the defense up to three additional weeks to supplement the evidence before the court with affidavits. Issue 2: Suppression of videotaped statement Jacobs argues that the interrogation was started despite the fact that he, his parents and the police knew that an attorney was being contacted. A confession is voluntary if, taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances, the statement is the product of the accused’s free and rational choice. Here, Jacobs testified that he was not promised, threatened or coerced to give the videotaped statement in Texas; that he gave his statement on his own free will, even though his father told him not to speak to anyone until his lawyer arrived; and that once he asked for his attorney, the interview was stopped. Therefore, the court did not err in denying Jacobs’s motion to suppress the videotaped statements made in Texas. Issue 3: Hearsay A witness of Jacobs, who had been indicted in a separate proceeding with a charge of criminal conspiracy, declined to answer any questions based on his Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination. The defense sought to question the law enforcement officer who interrogated this witness in order to show through this introduction of hearsay that there was another gun that was used to put Jacobs in duress forcing him to kill. Jacobs now argues that the court erred in refusing to admit this testimony. Reliability can be inferred where the evidence falls within a firmly rooted hearsay exception; otherwise, there must be a showing of particularized guarantees of trustworthiness. In this case, the statement does not show particularized guarantees of trustworthiness. Because there were three different versions of the statement of the witness, it cannot be said that if the statement had been cross-examined at trial it would have been of marginal utility. Issue 4: Lessor included offense instruction Jacobs argues that the court erred in refusing an instruction on the lesser included offense of manslaughter. The accused is entitled to a lesser offense instruction only where there is an evidentiary basis in the record for the instruction. Here, the court was correct in denying the manslaughter instruction because there was no factual basis or evidence to support the instruction. Even if Jacobs was found not guilty of murder, he would nevertheless be guilty of capital murder because the victim was killed in the commission of a robbery. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
