Case Title: Hines v. State

Citation: 417 So. 2d 924

Docket Number: 

State: mississippi

Court: Mississippi Supreme Court

Date: 1982-07-28T00:00:00Z

Document:
417 So. 2d 924 (1982) Tyrone HINES v. STATE of Mississippi. No. 53281. Supreme Court of Mississippi. July 28, 1982. J.R. Gilfoy, Lexington, for appellant. Bill Allain, Atty. Gen. by Frankie Walton White, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee. Before WALKER, P.J., and BROOM and ROY NOBLE LEE, JJ. WALKER, Presiding Justice, for the Court: This is an appeal by Tyrone Hines from a verdict and sentence for armed robbery in the Circuit Court of Holmes County, Mississippi. Hines was sentenced to twenty-five years in the Mississippi Department of Corrections. Feeling aggrieved, he appeals. According to the testimony of Mrs. Carl R. Arnold, the victim, Tyrone Hines and Shelton White entered her grocery and service station in West, Mississippi, on November 11, 1980, shortly before noon. After purchasing a package of cigarettes, beer and $1.00 of gas, Hines and White drove away. Both men returned within two hours to Arnold Grocery and Service Station. After asking for a beer, one of them struck Mrs. Arnold on the forehead twice with the butt of a .38 revolver. The appellant then threatened the victim that he would kill her if she moved. A cash box containing approximately $550.00 was taken. The testimony is conflicting as to who struck Mrs. Arnold. White testified that he entered the store with a .38 and Hines had a .32 automatic in his sock. White states that he struck the victim first and Hines hit her again as she fell. Mrs. Arnold, who was seventy-six years of age and suffering from arthritis, testified that she did not actually see who hit her. However, she stated that Hines was nearer to her when the blows were struck and that White would have been unable to reach her from his position in the store. Tyrone Hines did not testify at the trial. According to Shelton White's testimony earlier that morning Tyrone Hines, Roger Miller, Nathaniel Bailey and White had decided to rob the Arnold Grocery and Service Station in order to "get some money." After the robbery, Hines and White fled in Miller's car and met with Bailey and Miller on a dirt road in order to switch cars. Officer Nicky Johnson of the Durant Police Department, having been notified of the armed robbery, spotted a car and occupants matching the description of the alleged assailants. While attempting to flee, the assailant's vehicle went out of control and skidded off the road. Officer Johnson, assisted by the sheriff's department, arrested Nathaniel Bailey, Roger Miller, Shelton White and the defendant, Tyrone Hines. The officers recovered Mrs. Arnold's cash box and a .32 automatic from outside the vehicle, a .38 revolver under the front seat, an automatic shotgun from the back seat and a pump shotgun from the trunk. *925 At his trial for armed robbery, the defendant's motion for a directed verdict was overruled and the defendant rested without presenting any evidence on his behalf. The appellant first contends on appeal that the court erred in failing to grant his motion for a directed verdict of acquittal at the conclusion of the state's case. We find this assignment to be wholly without merit. Conflicts in the evidence are to be resolved by the jury. The facts recited above were more than ample to support the jury verdict. The appellant next argues that the court erred in failing to declare a mistrial, or in the alternative, to replace a juror, who was allegedly asleep, with an alternate juror to conclude the case. It was claimed that the juror had been asleep during the closing argument of the appellant. The trial judge made a finding that if the juror was indeed asleep, he awoke before the matter was brought to the attention of the court by appellant's counsel. This finding was made during the appellant's motion for a J.N.O.V. or in the alternative for a new trial, at which time the trial judge stated, in overruling the appellant's motion: In this case, the trial judge found that the juror was not asleep and thus there was no need to remove him from hearing the rest of the case.[1] We hold that due to the trial judge's finding that the juror was indeed awake, the appellant's assignment of error is without merit. The remaining assignments of error are without merit and warrant no discussion. For the reasons stated above, the cause is affirmed. AFFIRMED. PATTERSON, C.J., SUGG, P.J., and BROOM, ROY NOBLE LEE, BOWLING, HAWKINS and DAN M. LEE, JJ., concur. PRATHER, J., takes no part. [1] It has been most helpful to us that the trial judge explain his reasons for leaving the juror.