Coxwell v. State
Decision Date | 27 August 1980 |
Docket Number | No. 52008,52008 |
Citation | 387 So.2d 104 |
Parties | Merrida P. COXWELL v. STATE of Mississippi. |
Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
John R. Poole, Jackson, for appellant.
Bill Allain, Atty. Gen. by Frankie Walton White, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.
Before PATTERSON, BROOM and LEE, JJ.
LEE, Justice, for the Court:
Attorney Merrida P. Coxwell was convicted in the Circuit Court of the First Judicial District of Hinds County, Honorable William F. Coleman, presiding, for receiving stolen property, was sentenced to five (5) years in the state penitentiary and was disbarred from the practice of law. He has appealed and assigns as error that the court erred in failing to grant a mistrial because of the district attorney's final argument wherein he referred to Coxwell as a "crooked lawyer."
The evidence for the State indicates that on March 6, 1978, an unidentified couple left the Osborne Ford Motor Company lot in Tallulah, Louisiana, in a 1978 Cougar XR-7 automobile belonging to the dealership, ostensibly for the purpose of testing the car before buying same. The couple failed to return to the lot; the theft of the vehicle, which was valued at approximately seven thousand dollars ($7,000), was reported to the police.
Subsequently, the vehicle appeared at a truck stop in Vicksburg, Mississippi, where it was picked up and delivered to Jackson by one Murray Johnson, upon instructions of Tommy Thornton, who operated an automobile repair shop in Jackson. Johnson delivered the vehicle to Charley's Car Repair either on March 7 or 8, at which time he met the appellant, who was interested in purchasing it. Appellant inspected the automobile and then gave Thornton nine hundred fifty dollars ($950.00) for same. Johnson, an accomplice, testified to the above facts on the trial.
One William Thornton, upon instruction of the appellant, prepared a title application for the vehicle indicating the purchaser to be the Hightower Corporation, which was owned by appellant. A license tag for the automobile was issued to appellant by the Tax Collector's Office of Hinds County, listing as owner the Hightower Corporation. A Mississippi inspection sticker was obtained which noted appellant to be the owner.
Appellant testified that he purchased the vehicle from James Hood of Hood Auto Sales of Ellisville, Mississippi, and that he gave Hood five thousand dollars ($5,000) in cash and a diamond ring in exchange for it. His testimony was impeached in several particulars.
In final argument, the district attorney said the following:
I object to that, may it please the Court. That's improper.
I believe you are getting out of bounds, Mr. Peters.
BY MR. PETERS:
I beg your pardon?
I believe you are getting a little far afield.
BY MR. MOORE:
And I would move for a mistrial, Your Honor.
Overruled."
Appellant contends that the above mentioned argument of the district attorney was prejudicial and constituted reversible error, and cites cases in which similar remarks made by prosecuting attorneys required reversal: Ellis v. State, 254 So.2d 902 (Miss.1971) ("professional criminal"); Carr v. State, 208 So.2d 886 (Miss.1968) ("beastly nature"); Reed v. State, 232 Miss. 432, 99 So.2d 455 (1958) (); Tubb v. State, 217 Miss. 741, 64 So.2d 911 (1953) ( ); Mays v. State, 571 S.W.2d 429 (Ark.1978) ("dope pusher"); People v. Natoli, 70 Ill.App.3d 131, 26 Ill.Dec. 266, 387 N.E.2d 1096 (1979) (); Flynn v. State, 379 N.E.2d 548 (Ind.App.1978) ("drug dealer"); Commonwealth v. Collins, 374 Mass. 596, 373 N.E.2d 969 (1978) ("Animal"); Commonwealth v. Dougan, --- Mass.App. ---, 376 N.E.2d 1255 (1978) (); State v. Stewart, 162 N.J.Super. 96, 392 A.2d 234 (1978) (); People v. Matthews, 33 A.D.2d 679, 305 N.Y.S.2d 919 (1969), ("attack on defense lawyer"); People v. Hickman, 34 A.D.2d 831, 312 N.Y.S.2d 644 (1970) (); State v. Foster, 2 N.C.App. 109, 162 S.E.2d 583 (1968) (...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Johnson v. State, 53485
...jury in the present case was instructed that arguments, statements and remarks of counsel were not evidence. As stated in Coxwell v. State, 387 So.2d 104 (Miss.1980): Jury Instruction # 1, granted by the court, states in "Arguments, statements and remarks of counsel are intended to help you......
-
Shields v. State, 1998-KA-00965-COA.
...and in view of the brevity of these improper remarks, we conclude them to be error, without doubt, but harmless. See Coxwell v. State, 387 So.2d 104, 106 (Miss.1980) (holding as harmless error when state referred to defendant in closing as a "crooked ¶ 20. THE JUDGMENT OF THE CIRCUIT COURT ......