Preview:

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS 06/04/96 OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
NO. 94-KA-00178 COA JOE LEE BROWN APPELLANT v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE

THIS OPINION IS NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION AND MAY NOT BE CITED, PURSUANT TO M.R.A.P. 35-B

TRIAL JUDGE: HON. ROBERT WALTER BAILEY COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: CIRCUIT COURT OF LAUDERDALE COUNTY ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: ROGERS J. DRUHET, III ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: GLENN WATTS DISTRICT ATTORNEY: E. J. MITCHELL NATURE OF THE CASE: CRIMINAL: ARMED ROBBERY TRIAL COURT DISPOSITION: GUILTY VERDICT; SENTENCED TO 12 YRS IN PRISON AND FINED

BEFORE THOMAS, P.J., KING AND SOUTHWICK, JJ.

SOUTHWICK, J., FOR THE COURT: Joe Lee Brown was convicted of armed robbery and sentenced to serve twelve years in prison. He appeals his conviction, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence. We find no merit in his appeal and affirm. There was evidence at trial that on January 24, 1992, a convenience store in Meridian was robbed by Brown. Earlier, a friend of Brown's had shoplifted beer from the store and, when the men ran out of beer, Brown was sent back for more. Instead of completing the assigned errand, Brown leapt over the store counter and held a knife similar to a meat cleaver in the clerk's face. Brown emptied the cash register and returned to where he and his friend had been drinking. He told his friend that he had robbed the store. The store clerk later described her assailant. Brown was apprehended. The clerk identified Brown in a live line up after she had been unsuccessful in recognizing his picture in a photographic line up consisting of more than one hundred pictures. Brown was indicted, tried, and convicted for this armed robbery. Brown's challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence centers around his contention that the identification of him by a witness was inadequate to link him to the crime. Brown does not argue that the evidence of the identification was inadmissible by virtue of undue suggestiveness. Consequently, the test under Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188, 198-200 (1972) is not invoked. We find that there is sufficient evidence to link Brown to the armed robbery at issue in this appeal and, further, that there was sufficient evidence of the other elements of armed robbery. In our review of the sufficiency of the evidence, we accept as true all of the evidence consistent with Brown's guilt together with any reasonable inferences that may be drawn from the evidence. Heidel v. State, 587 So. 2d 835, 838 (Miss. 1991). Reversal is not appropriate unless evidence of the elements of the crime is such that reasonable and fair minded jurors could only find the accused not guilty. Wetz v. State, 503 So. 2d 803, 808 (Miss. 1987). Otherwise, if there is disputed proof, the jury is entrusted with the exercise of impartial judgment to consider the weight and the credibility of the evidence. McClain v. State, 625 So. 2d 774, 778 (Miss. 1993); McFee v. State, 511 So. 2d 130, 13334 (Miss. 1987). This appeal concerns a case of disputed proof. Armed robbery requires proof of the taking of personal property of another from that person against his will by putting the victim in fear of immediate physical injury. Miss. Code Ann.

Download Joe Lee Brown v. State of Mississippi.pdf

Mississippi Law