Moore v. State
| Docket Number: | 2015-KA-00207-SCT Linked Case(s): 2015-KA-00207-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 01-28-2016 Opinion Author: Randolph, P.J. Holding: Affirmed. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Felony shoplifting - Application of section 97-23-93 - Admission of testimony - Personal knowledge - Owner's estimate of value Judge(s) Concurring: Waller, C.J, Dickinson, P.J., Lamar, Kitchens, Pierce, King and Coleman, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Maxwell, J. Procedural History: JNOV Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 11-12-2014 Appealed from: HARRISON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: HON. LISA P. DODSON Disposition: Convicted of felony shoplifing, an sentenced to 5 years, as a habitual offender to be served day for day in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections without the possibility for parole or early release District Attorney: Joel Smith Case Number: B2402-13-556 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Lester Darrell Moore a/k/a Lester Moore a/k/a Lester Jackson Moore |
OFFICE OF THE STATE PUBLIC DEFENDER: HUNTER NOLAN AIKENS, GEORGE T. HOLMES |
|
|
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: BILLY L. GORE | ||
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Felony shoplifting - Application of section 97-23-93 - Admission of testimony - Personal knowledge - Owner's estimate of value |
| Summary of the Facts: | Lester Moore was convicted of felony shoplifting and sentenced to five years as a habitual offender. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Section 97-23-93 Moore argues that the trial court failed to apply the ameliorative provisions contained in the amendments to section 97-23-93(5) and (7). The statute was amended by the Legislature after Moore was indicted but prior to his trial. Moore asked for a jury instruction that reflected the amended statute, which would find him guilty of felony shoplifting only if the price of the goods exceeded $1,000, but the court denied his request. When the statutory penalty for a particular crime is legislatively reduced after the date of the commission of the crime but before the date of sentencing, the trial court must sentence the defendant under the amended statute. However, the same is not true for an amended statute that relates to the elements of the criminal offense. Thus, the trial court properly denied Moore’s instruction. Issue 2: Admission of testimony Moore argues that the court erred in allowing an officer to testify regarding the value of the stolen wallets, because the officer lacked personal knowledge. Individuals may testify as to the value of their own property. The owner’s estimate does not have to be rationally based, and no predicate is required other than ownership. Here, Dillard’s representative testified that the value of the fourteen wallets was $1,726, as reflected by the price tags still on the wallets. The trial court properly ruled that the officer was restricted to personal knowledge and observation. The officer’s answer was nonresponsive to the question of whether he had personal knowledge of the value of the wallets. Instead of responding either yes or no, which would have allowed the trial court to exclude the evidence, the officer blurted out the value of the wallets. But since Dillard’s representative had testified without objection that the total value of the fourteen wallets recovered was $1,726, the officer’s repetitious valuation is harmless. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
