 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Wilson v. State7/27/2004
NATURE OF THE CASE: CRIMINAL - FELONY
DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED - 07/27/2004
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
. On February 5, 2003, a jury in the Circuit Court of Lauderdale County found Charles Edward Wilson guilty of sale of cocaine. Wilson was sentenced to serve twenty-five years in custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections. Aggrieved, Wilson now appeals to this Court asserting the following issues: (1) the trial court erred in accepting the State's racially-neutral reasons after his Batson challenges; (2) he was denied a fair trial when the State outlined its burden of proof during voir dire; (3) the trial court erred in allowing hearsay testimony into evidence; (4) he was denied effective assistance of counsel; and (5) the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction.
FACTS
. On August 3, 2001, Agent John Peterson of the Mississippi Drug Task Force was working in an undercover capacity in Lauderdale County. Peterson, along with a confidential informant, drove to Wilson's residence and knocked on the door. Wilson answered, spoke with the informant, and went towards the direction of a known drug house. The informant waited in the car with Peterson. Shortly thereafter Wilson approached the car on the driver's side where Peterson was sitting and showed the men in the car a large rock-like substance. Wilson quoted the price of this rock as a "bill." Peterson then gave Wilson five $20 bills before taking the rock-like substance.
. Peterson later turned the substance over to Greg Lea, another Drug Task Force agent. The substance was later determined to be a.94 gram rock of cocaine. The transaction was audio and video taped.
DISCUSSION OF ISSUES
I. DID THE TRIAL COURT ERR IN ACCEPTING THE STATE'S RACIALLY-NEUTRAL REASONS AFTER HIS BATSON CHALLENGES?
. In his first issue, Wilson argues that the trial court erred in accepting the State's racially-neutral reasons for striking prospective black jurors. Our standard of review requires a reversal only if the factual findings of the trial judge are "clearly erroneous or against the overwhelming weight of the evidence." Tanner v. State, 764 So. 2d 385 ( ) (Miss. 2000). Any determination made by a trial judge under Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), is accorded great deference because it is "based, in a large part, on credibility." Coleman v. State, 697 So. 2d 777, 785 (Miss. 1997). The term "great deference" has been defined in the Batson context as meaning an insulation from appellate reversal of any trial findings which are not clearly erroneous. Lockett v. State, 517 So. 2d 1346, 1349 (Miss. 1987).
. The Batson decision provides procedural directives for the trial court to follow in detecting and disallowing the practice of using peremptory challenges to remove members of an identified racial group from jury service based upon nothing more than their racial identification. To successfully assert a Batson claim, the following procedure must occur:
First, the defendant must make a prima facie showing that the prosecutor has exercised peremptory challenges on the basis of race. Second, if the requisite showing has been made, the burden shifts to the prosecutor to articulate a race-neutral explanation for striking the jurors in question. Finally, the trial court must determine whether the defendant has carried his burden of proving purposeful discrimination.
Berry v. State, 728 So. 2d 568 ( ) (Miss. 1999) (citing Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352, 358- 59 (1991)). "When the prosecution gives race-neutral reasons for its peremptory strikes, the sufficiency of the defendant's prima facie case becomes
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Mississippi DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|