Williams v. State
| Docket Number: | 2002-KA-00752-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 11-18-2003 Opinion Author: King, P.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Sexual battery - Sufficiency of evidence - Child witness Judge(s) Concurring: McMillin, C.J., Southwick, P.J., Bridges, Thomas, Lee, Irving, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 10-30-2001 Appealed from: Adams County Circuit Court Judge: Forrest Johnson, Jr. Disposition: SEXUAL BATTERY - SENTENCED TO SERVE A TERM OF 30 YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF MDOC. District Attorney: Ronnie Lee Harper Case Number: 00-KR-0200-J |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Edward Lee Williams |
PAMELA A. FERRINGTON |
||
| 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: | Sexual battery - Sufficiency of evidence - Child witness |
| Summary of the Facts: | Edward Williams was found guilty of sexual battery and sentenced to serve thirty years. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Sufficiency of evidence Williams argues that the evidence was legally insufficient to support the conviction. Williams concedes that the State put on sufficient proof of the ages of the victim and the perpetrator. The State also put on proof of sexual penetration of the child. Therefore, there was sufficient proof of the elements of the crime of sexual battery. Issue 2: Child witness Williams argues that the court erred in allowing the child witness to testify. A child is competent to testify if the court ascertains that the child possesses the ability to perceive and remember events, to understand and answer questions intelligently and to comprehend and accept the importance of truthfulness. Williams points out inconsistencies in the victim’s testimony and contends that her testimony seemed to be coached. Questions of credibility and inconsistencies in testimony are matters for the jury to resolve. In addition, the court asked the victim several questions to determine whether she would be allowed to testify and did not abuse its discretion in allowing the testimony. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
