Clay v. State
| Docket Number: | 2003-KA-00235-COA Linked Case(s): 2003-CT-00235-SCT ; 2003-KA-00235-COA |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 08-24-2004 Opinion Author: Chandler, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Burglary of dwelling - Identification testimony - Separate verdicts - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Sufficiency of evidence Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Bridges, P.J., Lee, Myers and Griffis, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Irving and Barnes, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 11-25-2002 Appealed from: Lauderdale County Circuit Court Judge: Larry Eugene Roberts Disposition: BURGLARY OF A DWELLING - 25 YEARS District Attorney: Bilbo Mitchell Case Number: 459-02 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Willie Earl Clay a/k/a Willie E. Clay, Jr. |
JAMES A. WILLIAMS |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: CHARLES W. MARIS 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 dwelling - Identification testimony - Separate verdicts - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Sufficiency of evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Willie Clay was found guilty of burglary of a dwelling and sentenced as an habitual offender to twenty-five years. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Identification testimony Clay argues that he was prejudiced by the State’s questioning of an investigator regarding the victim’s identification of Clay from a photo line-up as well as his discussion with other investigators which led to the development of Clay as a suspect. Because Clay’s attorney did not object at trial to the lines of questioning to which he now objects, his right to raise these issues for appellate review is forfeited. Issue 2: Separate verdicts Clay argues that the court erred in failing to grant his motion for a mistrial after the jury returned two verdicts: one finding Clay guilty of burglary of a dwelling and the other finding him guilty of illegal trespass. The general rule is that the court may require the jury to clear up an indefinite or ambiguous verdict. In fact, it is the duty of the court to direct the jury to reconsider their verdict when satisfied that there has been a palpable mistake. Here, the judge correctly followed the law by re-instructing the jurors as to the proper form of the verdict and sending them back to the jury room for further deliberations. Issue 3: Ineffective assistance of counsel Clay argues that his attorney failed to adequately pursue at trial his defense that he did not have the requisite intent to commit burglary. Counsel's choice of whether to file certain motions, call witnesses, ask certain questions, or make certain objections falls within the ambit of trial strategy and cannot give rise to an ineffective assistance of counsel claim. Clay’s claims fall wholly within the realm of trial strategy. Issue 4: Sufficiency of evidence Clay argues that the evidence does not support the jury’s finding that he was guilty of burglary, because his statement explained his presence in the victim’s house and suggests that the situation was simply a misunderstanding. Evidence was presented to show that Clay had approached the victim at her house only a week before the break-in. On the afternoon of the break-in, the victim’s car was not parked in front of her house and it was not apparent that she was at home. Her locked front door was kicked open and Clay entered the house. He fled when she screamed for help. There is sufficient evidence to support the jury’s verdict. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
