Page v. State


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2007-KA-00427-SCT

Supreme Court: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 09-18-2008
Opinion Author: DICKINSON, J.
Holding: Affirmed

Additional Case Information: Topic: Conspiracy to commit drive-by shooting - Procedural bar
Judge(s) Concurring: SMITH, C.J., WALLER AND DIAZ, P.JJ., EASLEY, CARLSON, GRAVES, RANDOLPH AND LAMAR, JJ.
Procedural History: Jury Trial
Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 05-23-2006
Appealed from: Jones County Circuit Court
Judge: Billy Joe Landrum
Disposition: Count I: Conviction of conspiracy to commit a drive by shooting and sentence of five (5) years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections. Sentence in Count l shall run consecutively with the sentence in Count lll. Count II: Conviction of drive by shooting and sentence of five (5) years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections. Sentence in Count ll shall run consecutively with sentence in Count I. Count III: Conviction of murder and sentence of life imprisonment in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections.
District Attorney: Anthony J. Buckley
Case Number: 2005-56-KR2B

  Party Name: Attorney Name:   Brief(s) Available:
Appellant: ZACHARISE PAGE a/k/a ZACKERISE PAGE




MICHAEL DUANE MITCHELL



 

Appellee: STATE OF MISSISSIPPI OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: STEPHANIE BRELAND WOOD  

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: Conspiracy to commit drive-by shooting - Procedural bar

Summary of the Facts: Zacharise Page was convicted of conspiracy to commit drive-by shooting, driveby shooting, and murder. He appeals.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: Page moved for a directed verdict at the close of the State’s case-in-chief. This motion was denied. Page then presented evidence on his own behalf. At the conclusion of all evidence, Page did not renew his motion for directed verdict. Only after the jury was instructed and the case was submitted to them did Page attempt to renew his motion for directed verdict. Therefore, he failed to preserve the issue of the trial court’s denial of his motion. In addition, the record does not contain a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a motion for new trial. He is thus procedurally barred from raising on direct appeal the issues which should have been raised in the trial court.


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