Williams v. State
| Docket Number: | 2003-KA-01378-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 09-07-2004 Opinion Author: King, C.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Burglary of building & Conspiracy to commit burglary of building - Trial in absentia Judge(s) Concurring: Bridges and Lee, P.JJ., Irving, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Barnes, J. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 05-29-2003 Appealed from: Pike County Circuit Court Judge: Mike Smith Disposition: BURGLARY OF A BUILDING (COUNT I) AND CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT BURGLARY OF A BUILDING (COUNT II) -SENTENCED TO A TERM OF EIGHTY-FOUR CONSECUTIVE MONTHS ON COUNT I AND SIXTY CONSECUTIVE MONTHS ON COUNT II IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MDOC. IT IS ORDERED THAT COUNT I AND COUNT II RUN CONCURRENTLY. District Attorney: Dee Bates Case Number: 03-025-KB |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Catlin Williams |
WILLIAM E. GOODWIN |
||
| 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: | Burglary of building & Conspiracy to commit burglary of building - Trial in absentia |
| Summary of the Facts: | Catlin Williams was tried in absentia on the charges of burglary of a building and conspiracy to commit the crime of burglary of a building. He was convicted of the charges and sentenced to eighty-four consecutive months on count one and sixty consecutive months on count two. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Williams argues that he was denied the right to be present at his trial. The case of Jefferson v. State, 807 So. 2d 1222 (Miss. 2002) carved out an exception where a defendant may be tried in absentia based on willful, voluntary, and deliberate actions to avoid trial. Testimony was offered by the State which indicated that Williams was clearly aware of his trial date and that Williams failed to contact his attorney or the court regarding his whereabouts. Therefore, there was no error in the court's decision to try Williams in absentia. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
