 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Runnels v. State, NO. 2006-CP-01097-COA,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSISSIPPI, May 15, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where trial court denied appellant's first motion for postconviction relief from judgments convicting him on pleas of guilty to manslaughter and armed robbery, appellant was not entitled to relief from judgment under Miss. R. Civ. P. 60(b) based on a claim that he did not authorize counsel to file the motion. He showed no exceptional circumstances.
|
|||||
| Scarborough v. State, NO. 2005-KA-00500-COA,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSISSIPPI, May 15, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Evidence was sufficient to convict defendant of capital murder with underlying felony being robbery, Miss. Code Ann. § 97-3-19(2)(e), because 1) although she did not hit victim, she was either an aider and abetter or accessory before fact, Miss. Code Ann. § 97-1-3; and 2) she admitted that she told accomplice to search victim's underwear for money.
|
|||||
| Shumaker v. State, NO. 2006-KP-00039-COA,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSISSIPPI, May 15, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Elapsed time period of 106 days did not violate Miss. Code Ann. § 99-17-1, which required a trial within 270 days. Thus, there was no violation of his statutory right to speedy trial, and, therefore, no violation of speedy trial right under Miss. Const. art. I, § 26. Also, there was no violation of his federal constitutional right to speedy trial.
|
|||||
| Travis v. State, NO. 2004-KA-00097-COA,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSISSIPPI, May 15, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant was legally drunk. Also, there was sufficient circumstantial evidence to convict him of DUI homicide, Miss. Code Ann. § 63-11-30(1)(c), (5), as jury could conclude that he drove car that killed victim as (1) he was at scene; (2) he was sole non-emergency personnel there; and (3) he did not mention that anyone else could have been driving.
|
|||||
| Tritle v. Tritle, NO. 2005-CA-01768-COA,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSISSIPPI, May 15, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Chancellor properly awarded child custody to mother as (1) she offered continuity of care prior to the separation; (2) she had parenting skills, willingness, and capacity to provide primary child care; and (3) none of her co-workers or friends had ever witnessed her allegedly uncontrollable temper. Also, chancellor properly awarded alimony to her.
|
|||||
| Wilson v. State, NO. 2005-KA-01752-COA,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSISSIPPI, May 15, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a murder case, a trial court did not err by allowing evidence of a prior shooting involving the same victim and defendant's rap lyrics about such under Miss. R. Evid. 404(b) in order to show an absence of mistake or accident. Defendant contended that he did not mean to shoot the victim while showing her his rifle.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
