McLaurin v. State
| Docket Number: | 2003-KA-00688-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 09-14-2004 Opinion Author: Bridges, P.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Felony DUI - Double jeopardy - Proof of blood alcohol content - Prior convictions - Jury instruction Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee, 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: 03-19-2003 Appealed from: Harrison County Circuit Court Judge: Jerry O. Terry, Sr. Disposition: FELONY DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE, SENTENCED TO FIVE YEARS TO RUN CONSECUTIVELY TO THE SENTENCE PRESENTLY BEING SERVED. District Attorney: Cono A. Caranna, II Case Number: B2401-2001-0625 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | James Edward McLaurin |
JIM DAVIS |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: 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: | Felony DUI - Double jeopardy - Proof of blood alcohol content - Prior convictions - Jury instruction |
| Summary of the Facts: | James McLaurin was convicted of felony driving under the influence and sentenced to five years. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Double jeopardy McLaurin argues that his constitutional right against double jeopardy has been violated, because his prior misdemeanor DUIs in his Harrison County conviction as well as in his Jefferson Davis County conviction. Prior convictions which are constitutionally valid in and of themselves may appropriately be used to enhance punishment for subsequent convictions. McLaurin’s prior convictions were properly considered for the sole purpose of enhancing punishment. Issue 2: Proof of blood alcohol content McLaurin argues that the court erred in failing to direct a verdict of not guilty because the State failed to prove that he operated a motor vehicle while having an alcohol concentration of .10% or more in his blood. The officer in this case testified that the particular machine used to test McLaurin had been calibrated and certified and that the instrument was used for breath analysis in order to determine blood alcohol content. When asked what blood alcohol concentration the machine gave for McLaurin, he replied, ".151." The testimony was sufficient to allow the jury to determine whether the State had proven that McLaurin was operating a motor vehicle while having a blood alcohol content of .10% or more. Issue 3: Prior convictions McLaurin argues that because he was not represented by counsel for his previous conviction, his prior misdemeanors should not have been allowed to enhance his sentence. So long as a previous uncounseled misdemeanor conviction did not result in a sentence of imprisonment, the court does not err in considering the prior uncounseled misdemeanor DUI in sentencing. Because McLaurin did not receive further jail time after having pled guilty, his argument is without merit. Issue 4: Jury instruction McLaurin argues that the court erred in refusing his instruction that “The Court instructs the jury that there is no presumption that the breath test results taken in this case relate back in time to the condition of the Defendant, James Edward McLaurin, at the time of driving." If the instructions fairly announce the law of the case and create no injustice, no reversible error will be found. Here, the jurors were adequately instructed that McLaurin was presumed innocent and that the State had the burden to prove every element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt, including the fact that McLaurin had a blood alcohol level of .10% or more at the time he was operating a motor vehicle. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
