Thomas v. State Of Miss.
| Decision Date | 23 September 2010 |
| Docket Number | NO. 2009-KA-00216-SCT,2009-KA-00216-SCT |
| Parties | TONNIE L. THOMAS v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: OFFICE OF INDIGENT APPEALS BY: LESLIE S. LEE
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: JOHN R. HENRY, JR.
TRIAL JUDGE: HON. RICHARD A. SMITH
COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: WASHINGTON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
DISTRICT ATTORNEY: WILLIE DEWAYNE RICHARDSON
NATURE OF THE CASE: CRIMINAL-FELONY
EN BANC.
CHANDLER, JUSTICE, FOR THE COURT:
¶1 Tonnie L. Thomas was indicted for fourth-degree arson for setting fire to a jail cell in Greenville, Mississippi. On January 28-29, 2009, Thomas was tried in the Circuit Court of Washington County. The jury convicted Thomas of fourth-degree arson. Thomas had a separate sentencing hearing and was determined to be an habitual offender pursuant to Mississippi Code Section 99-19-83. The trial court sentenced Thomas to life in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections (MDOC) without the possibility of parole orprobation. Thomas now appeals from that conviction and sentence. Finding no error, this Court affirms the verdict and sentence.
FACTS
¶2. While detained in the City of Greenville Jail, Thomas admittedly set a fire in his jail cell. Officer Terrence Wigfall, a patrolman, testified at Thomas's arson trial that on March 3, 2007, he had been working as a jailer at the Greenville Police Department. Early that morning, Wigfall and Thomas had a confrontation. Thomas was in a single-man jail cell located in the rear of the jail. The cell had three concrete walls and one wall of bars. Both men "exchanged words back and forth" that day. Thomas requested some medical attention for wounds that he had received at a previous time. Officer Wigfall stated that "I told him I wasn't going to clean his wounds, but I would get the stuff for him to clean them himself." As Wigfall walked away, Thomas made a remark like "I have something for you" and Wigfall returned to Thomas's cell. When Wigfall went toward the cell, Thomas grabbed a bucket, dipped it into the toilet, and threw the water in Wigfall's face. Wigfall stated that Thomas made a statement "[t]hat he [Thomas] would kill me if he wasn't locked up."
¶3. Later that day, Howard Plant, a trusty, ran to the jailer's office located in the front of the jail and screamed that there was a fire. Wigfall ran to the back of the jail; saw a fire in the first cell, which was Thomas's cell; and ran to the front of the jail to get a fire extinguisher. When Wigfall first arrived at the cell, he saw a blanket that had been woven through the bars of the cell and a small fire. Because of the blanket, Wigfall could not see inside the cell or see Thomas. Officer Donell Robinson was with Wigfall when the fire occurred. Wigfall turned around to get an extinguisher, and by the time Officer Robinsonreturned with another extinguisher, Wigfall had put out the fire. However, the fire had spread in the time that it took Wigfall to return with an extinguisher. During this time, Thomas, as far as Wigfall knew, was still in his cell. Wigfall could not see Thomas because of the smoke and because the cell was dark. The smoke drifted from Thomas's cell into the other cells, causing other inmates to cough from the smoke. Wigfall notified the police captain of the fire and the fire department. The fire department arrived at the jail. Thomas was restrained and placed in the drunk tank. On the way to the holding tank, Wigfall stated that Thomas said, Wigfall stated that Thomas had an angry demeanor as he was going to the tank and that he was covered in dry extinguisher powder. The fire department then began to ventilate the area with fans. Wigfall stated that Thomas was angry because he was denied use of the telephone and he had been denied medical attention. At that point, Thomas set the fire.
¶4. After Wigfall's testimony, Thomas requested to return to jail for the remainder of the trial. The trial court had an on-the-record discussion with Thomas and his counsel, informing Thomas of the limitations should Thomas wish to testify in his trial. Thomas did not want to testify, and he returned to jail. The trial court instructed the jury on its return to the courtroom that Thomas had chosen voluntarily to absent himself from the proceedings.
¶5. Robinson also testified and substantiated much of Wigfall's account of the incident. Robinson was with Wigfall when Thomas threw the toilet water into Wigfall's face. Robinson testified, Robinson later clarified that Thomas had meant that he wanted to kill Wigfall.
¶6. After the fire had been extinguished and while Thomas was being escorted to the drunk tank, Robinson heard Thomas state, On cross-examination, Robinson admitted that his report did not have Thomas's statement that he wanted to kill everyone. However, Robinson stated that Thomas did admit that "I started this fire with matches." Robinson also stated that Thomas had said that he set the fire to get out of his cell.
¶7. Victor Anderson, captain of the Greenville Fire Department, testified that, prior to verifying that the fire had been extinguished, he had waited for the police to get an inmate out of the cell. As the police officers handcuffed and brought the inmate out of the cell, the inmate stated "I tried to kill them, I tried to see what they were made out of." The fire department ventilated the jail for about twenty minutes to clear the thick smoke from the fire. Anderson described the cell as being charred and having dry extinguisher chemicals throughout the room. The walls of the cell were charred, and the top part of the enclosed ceiling had damage. Anderson stated that charring could be caused only by fire. In addition, Anderson stated that he did not know who the inmate wanted to kill and that his report did not contain the statement made by the inmate. He also testified that he was not permitted to assess the value of property damage to a structure.
¶8. Officer Christopher Tharp also responded to the fire at the Greenville City Jail. According to his testimony, when he entered the building, he noticed heavy smoke. As he went upstairs to the jail, another officer, Officer Equoane Smith, was ahead of him. Once he saw that the fire was extinguished, Tharp, Smith, and other jail staff escorted Thomas to the "small tank." Tharp stated that Thomas had said "I caught it on fire. Yeah, I caught it.
I caught it.... Yeah, yeah, I caught it. I caught it on fire with matches." After ventilation of the jail was completed, Tharp gathered evidence of the fire. Tharp collected a blanket, a sheet, and a Double Quick match box with no wooden matches in it. The sheet was in small pieces because of the fire. Officer Smith also testified that he had heard Thomas state "Yeah, I set it, yeah, I set it." At the time, Smith did not know what Thomas was referring to in his statement.
¶9. Fred Jones, Jr., a jailer at the Greenville Police Department, testified about the condition of the jail cell. He noticed that a blanket, sheet, and mattress were burned in the cell. The mattress was thrown away, because the center was badly burned and unusable. Later, the cell was repainted and sanitized with bleach to clean the soot.
¶10. James Whitehead, a support-service worker at the Greenville Police Department, proffered testimony outside the presence of the jury about the repairs to the jail cell after the fire. In his proffer, Whitehead stated that he did not know the cost of the repairs for the damage to the cell.
¶11. Following his conviction and sentence, Thomas raised four issues on appeal as follows:
I. Sufficiency of the Evidence and Weight of the Evidence
¶12. Thomas asserts that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury verdict and that the verdict was against the overwhelming weight of the evidence. Thomas claims that he was simply trying to get attention because he wanted to make a telephone call and to get medical attention.
¶13. This Court has stated that the standard of review for a directed verdict and a judgment notwithstanding the verdict are the same. Barfield v. State, 22 So. 3d 1175, 1185 (Miss. 2009). Both challenge the legal sufficiency of the evidence. Id. On appellate review, this Court must "consider all of the evidence-not just the evidence which supports the case for the prosecution-in the light most favorable to the verdict" in regard to each element of the offense. Fleming v. State, 732 So. 2d 172, 182 (Miss. 1999) (citing Cooper v. State, 639 So. 2d 1320, 1324 (Miss. 1994)). When credible evidence is consistent with guilt, it is accepted as true, and the prosecution has the benefit of all reasonable inferences drawn from this evidence. Cooper, 639 So. 2d at 1324. In Stewart v. State, 986 So. 2d 304, 308 (Miss. 2008), this Court stated:
[T]he critical inquiry is whether the evidence shows "beyond a reasonable doubt that accused committed the act charged, and that he did so under such circumstances that every element of the offense existed; and where the evidence fails to meet this test it is insufficient to support a conviction." Carr v. State, 208 So. 2d 886, 889 (Miss. 1968). The relevant question is whether, after viewing 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, 315, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L. Ed. 2d 560 (1979).
Stewart v. State, 986 So. 2d 304, 308 (Miss. 2008) (quoting Jones v. State, 904 So. 2d 149, 153-54 (Miss. 2005)).
¶14. The indictment stated in part:
That TONNIE L. THOMAS, on or about 3rd Day of March, 2007, in Washington County, did unlawfully, willfully and...
To continue reading
Request your trial