Moore v. State


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2002-KA-01337-COA

Court of Appeals: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 10-28-2003
Opinion Author: Chandler, J.
Holding: Affirmed

Additional Case Information: Topic: Armed robbery - Waiver of right to remain silent - Photographs - Sufficiency of evidence
Judge(s) Concurring: McMillin, C.J., King and Southwick, P.JJ., Bridges, Thomas, Lee, Irving, Myers and Griffis, JJ.
Procedural History: Jury Trial
Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 05-08-2002
Appealed from: Madison County Circuit Court
Judge: William E. Chapman, III
Disposition: ARMED ROBBERY - SENTENCED TO SERVE A TERM OF 35 YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF MDOC.
District Attorney: Rick Mitchell
Case Number: 2000-0012

  Party Name: Attorney Name:  
Appellant: Gerome Moore




WALTER E. WOOD



 

Appellee: State of Mississippi OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: 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: Armed robbery - Waiver of right to remain silent - Photographs - Sufficiency of evidence

Summary of the Facts: Gerome Moore was convicted of armed robbery and sentenced to thirty-five years. He appeals.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: Issue 1: Right to remain silent Moore gave two statements prior to his appointment of counsel. He argues that he did not give his consent to a waiver of his right to remain silent, and even if he did give consent, the waiver of his right to remain silent was unknowing due to his limited intelligence and emotional state. In determining whether a waiver is knowing and intelligent, courts are directed to look not just to impaired mental abilities of defendants, but rather to the totality of the circumstances. The record shows that Moore was thoroughly advised of his rights prior to the taking of the second statement. The first statement was not recorded, so there is no written waiver of rights. However, Moore's testimony on cross-examination shows that he understood his legal peril only too well. The record does not support Moore's contention that he lacked the mental capacity to understand the voluntary nature of his statement, as well as comprehend the gravity and importance of his admissions. Issue 2: Photographs Moore argues that admission of two photographs of the interior of the vehicle were unduly prejudicial. The record shows that the court correctly analyzed this issue, and nothing in the record supports disturbing that determination. Issue 3: Sufficiency of evidence Moore argues that there was insufficient evidence to find that he was an accomplice to the crime. The victim testified that all three men exited the Buick, and all three men participated in robbing her. In addition to this testimony, Moore's initial unrecorded statement was an admission of guilt. Therefore, there was sufficient evidence.


Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court