Rich v. State, 48670
| Decision Date | 13 October 1975 |
| Docket Number | No. 48670,48670 |
| Citation | 322 So.2d 468 |
| Parties | Dennis RICH v. STATE of Mississippi. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Pennington, Walker & Turner, West Point, for appellant.
A. F. Summer, Atty. Gen., by Pate J. Cajoleas, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.
Before PATTERSON, INZER and WALKER, JJ.
Appellant, Dennis Rich, was indicted, tried and convicted in the Circuit Court of Oktibbeha County for the crime of burglary. He was sentenced to serve a term of six years in the State Penitentiary. From this conviction and sentence he appeals. We affirm.
Dr. J. F. Eckford testified on the morning after August 8, 1973, he discovered that his clinic in Starkville, Mississippi, had been burglarized, and that entry had been effected by the breaking of glass on the rear door. Two participants, Steve Oaks and Victor Marsh, testified that they and another participant, Bruce Manchester broke into the clinic and took a quantity of pills while the appellant stood watch outside the rear door of the clinic. Both indicated that the crime had been planned by all four of them earlier that night at the Mississippi State University Union after they had asked appellant if he knew where they could obtain some drugs.
Steve and Victor testified after the burglary the four of them went to Bruce Manchester's trailer and divided the drugs equally among themselves. This testimony was corroborated by Mrs. Myra Elkins, Bruce's mother, who was present at the trailer when the four boys arrived and divided the drugs.
Three witnesses testified for the appellant. Appellant's mother, Mrs. Laura Rich, testified that her son left Starkville during the last part of July and called her collect from Kankakee, Illinois, around August 8 or 9, 1973. She testified that he did not return to Starkville until August 20. Terry Miller, Dennis' brother, testified he was present when the appellant called from Kankakee, Illinois, on August 8, 1973. Robert Hurley, a resident of Illinois, testified that he saw appellant several times during early August 1973 in his home in Kankakee, Illinois.
Appellant contends that the trial court erred in overruling his motion for directed verdict at the conclusion of the state's case, and in failing to direct a judgment of acquittal at the conclusion of the trial. However, the appellant is precluded from raising any question regarding his motion for a directed verdict at the conclusion of the state's case by introducing evidence in his own behalf. Hankins v. State, 288 So.2d 866 (Miss.1974); Ross v. State, 234 Miss. 309, 106 So.2d 56 (1958).
With regard to the failure of the trial judge to direct a verdict at the conclusion of the defendant's case, we stated in Roberson v. State, 257 So.2d 505 (Miss.1972):
We have repeatedly pointed out that the trial judge in passing upon a motion for a directed verdict or peremptory instruction must assume that all evidence for the state is true, and must assume that all reasonable inferences that may be drawn from the evidence by the jury of reasonable men, is true, and if from all the testimony, there is enough in the record to support a verdict, the motion for a peremptory instruction should be overruled. Redwine v. State, 149 Miss. 741, 115 So. 889 (1928). (257 So.2d at...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Johnson v. State
...instruction must be denied. See also Jackson v. State, 440 So.2d 307 (Miss.1983); Gray v. State, 387 So.2d 101 (Miss.1980); Rich v. State, 322 So.2d 468 (Miss.1975); McGee v. Coccaro, 261 So.2d 465 (Miss.1972); and Carroll v. State, 196 So.2d 878 465 So.2d at 1035. As to the question of pro......
-
Holly v. State
...is sufficient to sustain a conviction. Foster, 639 So.2d at 1284; Culberson v. State, 379 So.2d 499, 503 (Miss.1979); Rich v. State, 322 So.2d 468, 469 (Miss.1975). However, this general rule is inapplicable where the accomplice testimony is unreasonable, self-contradictory or substantially......
-
Foster v. State
...accused may be convicted on the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice." Culberson v. State, 379 So.2d 499 (Miss.1979); Rich v. State, 322 So.2d 468 (Miss.1975); Moore v. State, 291 So.2d 187 (Miss.1974); Young v. State, 212 Miss. 460, 54 So.2d 671 (1951). However, citing Burns v. State,......
-
Culberson v. State
...is well established in our jurisprudence that an accused may be convicted on the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice. Rich v. State, 322 So.2d 468 (Miss.1975); Moore v. State, 291 So.2d 187 (Miss.1974); Young v. State, 212 Miss. 460, 54 So.2d 671 (1951); Larry v. State, 211 Miss. 563,......