 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Raines4/17/2002
gave a statement to the police. The defendant hid the gun under the floor of the second house he visited and then drove back towards his house. On the way, he stopped at the Golden Gallon and was apprehended by police while in the parking lot. Once in custody, the defendant gave a full statement to the police concerning the events surrounding the shooting and the location of the murder weapon.
Two law enforcement officers, who were involved in the investigation of the victim's murder, testified at the defendant's trial. Numerous photographs depicting the crime scene and the position of the victim's body were introduced into evidence at trial. One photograph of the contents of the victim's pocket, depicted two cigarette lighters, one of which was identified as the defendant's and the other as a plastic Bic lighter apparently belonging to the victim. An autopsy report was admitted indicating that the victim died from a single gunshot to the chest, which severed his aorta. A ballistics report was also introduced indicating that the murder weapon was a .22 caliber pistol and that the shot was fired from a distance of greater than two feet, but less than six feet, from the victim.
ANALYSIS
The defendant raises three issues in this appeal: whether there is sufficient evidence to support his conviction for second-degree murder; whether the trial court erred by denying the defendant's request to instruct the jury on his constitutional right to have a firearm in his home; and whether the defendant's sentence of twenty-two (22) years is excessive.
Sufficiency of Evidence
The defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his second-degree murder conviction. Specifically, he asserts that the undisputed material evidence supports a conviction of voluntary manslaughter or an acquittal based on self-defense. We disagree. When an accused challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, this Court's standard of review is whether, after considering the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 324, 99 S. Ct. 2781, 2789, 61 L. Ed. 2d 560 (1979); State v. Duncan, 698 S.W.2d 63, 67 (Tenn. 1985); Tenn. R. App. P. 13(e). This rule applies to findings of guilt based upon direct evidence, circumstantial evidence, or a combination of both direct and circumstantial evidence. State v. Brown, 551 S.W.2d 329, 331 (Tenn. 1977). Questions concerning the credibility of the witnesses, the weight and value to be given the evidence, as well as all factual issues raised by the evidence, are resolved by the trier of fact, not this Court. State v. Pappas, 754 S.W.2d 620, 623 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1987). Nor may this Court reweigh or reevaluate the evidence. State v. Cabbage, 571 S.W.2d 832, 835 (Tenn. 1978).
Furthermore, a jury verdict approved by the trial judge accredits the state's witnesses and resolves all conflicts in favor of the State. State v. Grace, 493 S.W.2d 474, 476 (Tenn. 1973). Because a verdict of guilt removes the presumption of innocence and replaces it with a presumption of guilt, the accused has the burden in this Court of illustrating why the evidence is insufficient to support the jury verdict returned by the trier of fact. State v. Tuggle, 639 S.W.2d 913, 914 (Tenn. 1982). On appeal, the State is entitled to the strongest legitimate view of the evidence and all reasonable inferences therefrom. Cabbage, 571 S.W.2d at 835.
In the instant case, the defendant was convicted of second degree murder. Second degree murder is defined as " knowing killing of another." Tenn. Code Ann. § 39
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Tennessee DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|