Jones v. State
| Docket Number: | 2002-KA-01528-COA Linked Case(s): 2002-KA-01528-COA |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 12-09-2003 Opinion Author: Griffis, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Embezzlement - Sufficiency of evidence - Cautionary instruction - Dismissal of juror Judge(s) Concurring: McMillin, C.J., King and Southwick, P.JJ., Bridges, Thomas, Lee, Irving, Myers and Chandler, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-05-2002 Appealed from: Lowndes County Circuit Court Judge: Lee J. Howard Disposition: CONVICTED OF EMBEZZLEMENT AND SENTENCED TO THREE YEARS, PAY ALL COSTS OF COURT, PAY A FINE OF $1,000, AND SENTENCED TO THREE YEARS OF POST-RELEASE SUPERVISION. District Attorney: Forrest Allgood Case Number: 2001-0008-CR1 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Willie B. Jones |
BENNIE L. JONES |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: SCOTT STUART |
|
|
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: | Embezzlement - Sufficiency of evidence - Cautionary instruction - Dismissal of juror |
| Summary of the Facts: | Willie Jones was convicted of embezzlement and sentenced to three years. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Sufficiency of evidence Jones argues that the evidence is insufficient, because the only proof of the elements of guilt is the testimony of his accomplice was self-contradictory. The uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice is sufficient to sustain a conviction unless it is unreasonable, self contradictory or substantially impeached. Here, there was sufficient evidence for the jury to find that Jones made an unauthorized sale of furniture and kept the money for himself. The contradiction in the testimony of the witness has no relationship to his testimony concerning Jones's participation in the crime. Issue 2: Cautionary instruction Jones argues that the court erred in failing to instruct the jury that the testimony of his accomplice should be considered with great caution. Because the defense did not offer or request an accomplice instruction, this issue is procedurally barred. Issue 3: Dismissal of juror Jones argues that the court erred when, during deliberations, the court dismissed a juror and substituted the alternate. Failure to object at trial waives the objection on appeal. Jones had an opportunity to object to the dismissal of the juror but failed to do so. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
