Willard v. State
| Docket Number: | 2010-KA-00927-COA Linked Case(s): 2010-KA-00927-COA |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 04-03-2012 Opinion Author: Carlton, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Capital murder & Aggravated assault - Motion to suppress - Miranda warnings Judge(s) Concurring: Lee, C.J., Irving and Griffis, P.JJ., Barnes, Ishee, Roberts, Maxwell, Russell and Fair, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 04-11-2006 Appealed from: Hinds County Circuit Court Judge: Tomie Green Disposition: CONVICTED OF COUNT I, CAPITAL MURDER, AND SENTENCED TO LIFE, WITHOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF PAROLE OR PROBATION; COUNT II, AGGRAVATED ASSAULT, AND SENTENCED TO TWENTY YEARS, WITH THE SENTENCES TO RUN CONSECUTIVELY, IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS Case Number: 03-0459 (1, 3) |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Adrian Williard a/k/a Adrian Willard |
VIRGINIA LYNN WATKINS |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: W. GLENN WATTS |
|
|
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: | Capital murder & Aggravated assault - Motion to suppress - Miranda warnings |
| Summary of the Facts: | Adrian Williard was convicted of capital murder and aggravated assault. He was sentenced to life without the possibility of parole for his murder conviction and to twenty years for aggravated assault. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Williard argues that the circuit judge erred in denying his motion to suppress due to the arresting officer’s failure to give Miranda warnings. Williard contends that he was “in custody,” for the purposes of Miranda, from the moment the officer arrived at the crime scene and exited his patrol car with his gun drawn and aimed at Williard. Williard claims that as the officer handcuffed him, the officer asked why Williard had “done it.” Prior to any questioning, the person must be warned that he has a right to remain silent, that any statement he does make may be used as evidence against him, and that he has a right to the presence of an attorney, either retained or appointed. The defendant may waive effectuation of these rights, provided the waiver is made voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently. If, however, he indicates in any manner and at any stage of the process that he wishes to consult with an attorney before speaking there can be no questioning. Likewise, if the individual is alone and indicates in any manner that he does not wish to be interrogated, the police may not question him. The record shows that at the suppression hearing, the officer testified that when he arrived at the crime scene after responding to an emergency call, he exited his vehicle and drew his weapon. The officer testified that Williard raised both of his hands in the air, and the officer made Williard get on the ground so that he could arrest Williard and put handcuffs on him. The officer testified that “right off the bat [Williard] confessed.” The officer explained that immediately after he arrived on the scene, Williard started talking to him about the circumstances surrounding the incident. The officer, as well as a neighbor who witnessed the violent altercation, testified that Williard began “bragging” about harming the two women and discussing the circumstances regarding the crime once the officer arrived on the scene. A confession or statement relating to culpability may be admitted into evidence if it is given freely and voluntarily, and without the influence of promises or threats. An officer is not required to turn a “deaf ear” to such statements. Here, the record contains substantial, credible evidence to support the circuit judge’s determination that no improper questioning by law enforcement occurred, and that Williard voluntarily made the statements to the officer regarding his guilt without interrogation or coercion. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
