Henley v. State
| Docket Number: | 2003-KM-01542-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 10-05-2004 Opinion Author: Bridges, P.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Speeding & DUI first offense - Admissibility of breath test - Weight of evidence Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee, P.J., Irving, Myers, Chandler, Griffis and Barnes, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Ishee, J. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - MISDEMEANOR |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 06-02-2003 Appealed from: Amite County Circuit Court Judge: Forrest Johnson Disposition: DEFENDANT FOUND GUILTY OF SPEEDING AND FIRST-OFFENSE DUI, AND ORDERED TO PAY FINES OF $498.00. District Attorney: Ronnie Lee Harper Case Number: 02-KR-049-J |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Charlie E. Henley |
BO ROLAND |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: CHARLES W. MARIS |
|
|
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: | Speeding & DUI first offense - Admissibility of breath test - Weight of evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Charlie Henley was convicted of speeding and DUI-first offense in justice court and ordered to pay fines and court costs equaling $77 for the speeding offense and $445 for the DUI conviction. Henley appealed to circuit court which affirmed and additionally ordered him to attend a ten-day Mississippi Alcohol Safety Education Program. Henley appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Results of breath test Henley argues that the court erred in determining that the police officer was qualified to administer the Intoxilyzer test. The results of a breath test are only valid if performed according to approved methods; performed by a person certified to do so; and performed on a machine certified to be accurate. The fact that the copy of the officer’s permit was not certified is inconsequential because the same result was effectuated by him testifying at trial. When asked about the copy on direct examination, he testified that “[t]his is my permit to conduct breath analysis on the Intoxilyzer 5000.” Therefore, the court properly admitted the permit into evidence, and the State proved that the officer was certified to perform the breath test. Issue 2: Weight of evidence Henley argues that the verdict was against the overwhelming weight of the evidence. Henley is procedurally barred from raising this issue for the first time on appeal. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
