Burglary of a Dwelling Penalty Example In Mississippi
The appellant appeals from the Circuit Court of Quitman County where he was found guilty after a trial by jury for the crime of burglary of a dwelling in violation of Miss. Code Ann. 97-17-23 (Rev. 1994).
He was sentenced to four years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections and to an additional four years of post-conviction release supervision upon release from his term of incarceration.
He asserts as error that evidence regarding cocaine possession and use should not have been introduced, that the verdict was against the overwhelming weight of the evidence, and that the case should have been dismissed. Finding no reversible error, the court affirmed and stated:
Evidence of recent possession is legally sufficient for the jury to infer guilt of burglary. Shields v. State, 702 So. 2d 380, 382 (Miss. 1997).
The law is clear that the jury is the judge of the weight and credibility of the testimony of each witness, and it is free to either accept or reject it. Bailey v. State, 729 So. 2d 1255, 1264 (Miss. 1999).
In determining whether a jury verdict is against the overwhelming weight of the evidence, the court must accept as true the evidence which supports the verdict and will reverse only when convinced that the circuit court has abused its discretion in failing to grant a new trial. Herring v. State, 691 So. 2d 948, 957 (Miss. 1997) (citing Thornhill v. State, 561 So. 2d 1025, 1030 (Miss. 1989)).
Only when the verdict is so contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence that to allow it to stand would sanction an unconscionable injustice will it be disturbed on appeal. Benson v. State, 551 So. 2d 188, 193 (Miss. 1989). Thus, the scope of review on this issue is limited in that all evidence must be construed in the light most favorable to the verdict. Mitchell v. State, 572 So. 2d 865, 867 (Miss. 1990).