Hollins v. State
| Docket Number: | 2010-KA-01965-COA Linked Case(s): 2010-KA-01965-COA ; 2010-CT-01965-SCT |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 04-10-2012 Opinion Author: Barnes, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Sale of cocaine - Voir dire - Prejudicial comments - Ineffective assistance of counsel Judge(s) Concurring: Lee, C.J., Irving and Griffis, P.JJ., Ishee, Roberts, Maxwell, Russell and Fair, JJ. Concurs in Result Only: Carlton, J., concurs in result only without separate written opinion Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 08-03-2010 Appealed from: Rankin County Circuit Court Judge: Samac Richardson Disposition: CONVICTED OF SALE OF COCAINE AND SENTENCED AS A HABITUAL OFFENDER TO SIXTY YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS WITHOUT ELIGIBILITY FOR PAROLE OR PROBATION District Attorney: Michael Guest Case Number: 20980 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Gregory Antonio Hollins |
CHOKWE LUMUMBA
IMHOTEP ALKEBU-LAN |
||
| 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: | Sale of cocaine - Voir dire - Prejudicial comments - Ineffective assistance of counsel |
| Summary of the Facts: | Gregory Hollins was convicted of the sale of cocaine and sentenced to sixty years as a habitual offender without eligibility for parole or probation. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Voir dire During voir dire, the State questioned members of the venire as to whether they could follow the instructions of the court regarding what the law said. Specifically, the State was referencing the law as it relates to the elements of accessory to a crime. Hollins argues that this line of questioning was designed to secure a pledge from the jurors to vote a certain way if a certain set of facts existed and, as such, was impermissible, misleading, and erroneous. Hollins did not object to this questioning at trial. Generally, a failure to make a contemporaneous objection during trial waives an issue on appeal. In addition, the State merely posed a hypothetical question regarding the venire’s ability to follow the law as instructed by the circuit court; it never asked the venire to find Hollins guilty. Thus, there was no error. Issue 2: Prejudicial comments Hollins argues that comments by the circuit judge in proposing a recess for lunch impermissibly pressured the jury to quickly reach a verdict. Defense counsel failed to make a contemporaneous objection to these comments; therefore, this issue is waived on appeal. In addition, there is nothing to indicate the circuit judge was pressuring the jury to reach a verdict by a certain time. Issue 3: Ineffective assistance of counsel Hollins argues that defense counsel’s failure to object to the judge’s comments constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel. Since the issues presented by Hollins did not constitute reversible error, there is no merit to this issue either. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
