Harris v. State


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2003-KA-01186-COA
Linked Case(s): 2003-CT-01186-SCT

Court of Appeals: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 12-07-2004
Opinion Author: King, C.J.

Additional Case Information: Topic: Aggravated assault & Felon in possession of firearm - Right of confrontation - Peremptory challenges
Judge(s) Concurring: Bridges and Lee, P.JJ., Irving, Myers, Chandler, Griffis, Barnes and Ishee, JJ.
Procedural History: Jury Trial
Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 05-08-2003
Appealed from: Carroll County Circuit Court
Judge: Clarence E. Morgan, III
Disposition: CONVICTION OF COUNT I AGGRAVATED ASSAULT; COUNT II FELON IN POSSESSION OF A FIREARM AND SENTENCED AS AN HABITUAL OFFENDER TO LIFE WHICH SENTENCE SHALL NOT BE REDUCED OR SUSPENDED NOR SHALL SAID DEFENDANT BE ELIGIBLE FOR PAROLE OR PROBATION.
District Attorney: Doug Evans
Case Number: 2002-0028 CR2

  Party Name: Attorney Name:  
Appellant: Ishmael Harris a/k/a Chico




IMHOTEP ALKEBU-LAN RAYMOND M. BAUM



 

Appellee: State of Mississippi OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: BILLY L. GORE  

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: Aggravated assault & Felon in possession of firearm - Right of confrontation - Peremptory challenges

Summary of the Facts: Ishamel Harris was convicted of aggravated assault and being a felon in possession of a firearm. As an habitual offender, Harris was sentenced to life imprisonment without the benefit of parole or probation. He appeals.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: Issue 1: Right of confrontation Harris argues that the court erred in unduly restricting defense counsel’s cross examination of witnesses for the state thereby depriving the defendant of his right to confront witnesses against him. Harris attempted to examine the victim on statements allegedly made to the grand jury disavowing any knowledge as to the identity of his assailant, but the court sustained the state's objection to the questions. While inconsistent grand jury testimony may appropriately be used for impeachment, there is nothing in the record which indicates what the victim's testimony was before the grand jury. In addition, any error is harmless because Harris was able to place before the jury, through the testimony of the victim and various other witnesses, the fact that the victim had previously denied any knowledge as to the identity of his assailant. Issue 2: Peremptory challenges Harris argues that the court erred when it accepted the State’s race neutral reasons for excluding five blacks from the jury. The reasons offered by the State were Juror 14 had never been gainfully employed and was not a student, and was believed to have concealed her knowledge of the defendant; Juror 17 had grown up with the defendant, had a family member involved in a crime, and was believed to be mentally slow; Juror 30 was unemployed and believed to be an alcoholic; and Juror 24 responded to no questions. The reasons given by the State would appear to fall within reasons which have been approved as race neutral.


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