Green v. State
| Docket Number: | 2003-KA-00215-COA Linked Case(s): 2003-KA-00215-COA |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 09-21-2004 Opinion Author: Lee, P.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Murder, Sexual battery, Kidnaping & Rape - Closing argument - Sufficiency of evidence - Exhibit Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Bridges, P.J., Irving, Myers, Chandler, Griffis and Barnes, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 12-06-2002 Appealed from: Warren County Circuit Court Judge: Isadore Patrick Disposition: COUNT 1 MURDER-- LIFE SENTENCE; COUNT 2 SEXUAL BATTERY-- THIRTY YEARS; COUNT 3 KIDNAPING-- THIRTY YEARS; COUNT 4 RAPE-- FORTY YEARS. District Attorney: G. Gilmore Martin Case Number: 02,135-CR-P |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Derrell Antonio Green |
PATRICK JOSEPH MCNAMARA |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: JOHN R. HENRY |
|
|
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: | Murder, Sexual battery, Kidnaping & Rape - Closing argument - Sufficiency of evidence - Exhibit |
| Summary of the Facts: | Derrell Green was convicted of murder, sexual battery, kidnaping, and rape. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Closing argument Green argues that the prosecutor made improper comments during closing argument which effectively switched the burden of proof from the State to the defendant. The standard of review that appellate courts must apply to lawyer misconduct during opening statements or closing arguments is whether the natural and probable effect of the improper argument is to create unjust prejudice against the accused so as to result in a decision influenced by the prejudice so created. Reviewing the closing argument as a whole in this case, the argument of which Green complains cannot be construed to have created such prejudice as to improperly affect the jury's verdict. Issue 2: Sufficiency of evidence Green argues that the testimony of an eyewitness and the testimony of the forensic pathologist contradict one another. The jury resolves the credibility of witnesses and the weight it accords to the evidence presented. The evidence presented to the jury in this case is not insufficient to the extent that reasonable and fair-minded jurors could only arrive at a conclusion of not guilty. Green also argues that there was no evidence offered regarding either the rape or the sexual battery, save for the testimony of the victim. The unsupported word of the victim of a sex crime is sufficient to support a guilty verdict where that testimony is not discredited or contradicted by other credible evidence. The victim’s account of the events surrounding the rape was corroborated by the testimony of number of witnesses. Green also argues that the evidence is not sufficient to support the verdict regarding the kidnaping. A witness testified that throughout the night Green repeatedly threatened her with death if she did not obey his orders, that she attempted to escape but Green chased her, caught her, threatened to shoot her, and forced her inside the murder victim's home. This testimony is not lacking to the extent that reasonable and fair-minded jurors could only have found Green not guilty of this charge. Issue 3: Exhibit Green argues that the State improperly utilized a washcloth that was retrieved from the bathroom at the murder victim's home and that allowing the washcloth into evidence without DNA testing resulted in a manifest injustice to him. The washcloth was clearly admitted into evidence, and the record shows that the State did not argue facts which were not admitted into evidence. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
