Christian v. State
| Docket Number: | 2002-KM-01592-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 11-18-2003 Opinion Author: Myers, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: DUI first offense - Opinion testimony - M.R.E. 701 - Sufficiency of evidence - Impairment of driving ability - Section 63-11-30(1) Judge(s) Concurring: McMillin, C.J., King and Southwick, P.JJ., Bridges, Thomas, Lee, Irving, Chandler and Griffis, JJ. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - MISDEMEANOR |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-09-2002 Appealed from: Grenada County Circuit Court Judge: Clarence E. Morgan, III Disposition: GUILTY OF DUI FIRST OFFENSE AND ORDERED TO PAY FINES OF $614.50 AND COSTS OF $205.50 Case Number: 2001-0198 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Timothy A. Christian |
A. E. (GENE) HARLOW |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: JEAN SMITH VAUGHAN |
|
|
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: | DUI first offense - Opinion testimony - M.R.E. 701 - Sufficiency of evidence - Impairment of driving ability - Section 63-11-30(1) |
| Summary of the Facts: | Timothy Christian was convicted of driving under the influence first offense in justice court. He appealed to the circuit court which also found him guilty. He was ordered to pay fines in the amount of $614.50 and court costs of $205.50. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Expert testimony Christian argues that the court erred by admitting opinion testimony of two officers, i.e., whether Christian was “under the influence” on the night in question, without the officers being tendered as experts. M.R.E. 701 allows a lay witness to testify in the form of opinions or inferences which are rationally based on the perception of the witness, helpful to the clear understanding of testimony or the determination of a fact in issue, and not based on scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge. Therefore, the officers could give testimony as to their personal observations of Christian. Their opinions were rationally based on the perceptions of the officers, helpful to the trier of fact, and not based on scientific knowledge. Issue 2: Sufficiency of evidence Christian argues that the evidence was insufficient. The State offered proof that Christian ran a stop sign and did not dim his headlights when an officer passed his car. Clearly this was reckless driving and the officers were justified in stopping Christian’s vehicle based on the traffic violations. The State also offered proof that the officer smelled the odor of alcohol coming from Christian’s vehicle and saw two six-packs of beer inside the car and that Christian exhibited belligerent behavior, used vulgar language and made threats. This was sufficient evidence. Issue 3: Impairment of driving ability Christian argues that the judge erred in finding him guilty of DUI-first offense given the lack of evidence on impairment of driving ability. Section 63-11-30(1) distinguishes driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor from driving while under the influence of another substance that impairs driving ability. Christian was charged with driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. Therefore, the State was not obligated to offer proof on impairment of Christian’s driving ability. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
