### “A. B.”wil l beuse d to i dentif y theminor c hil d in t

his ca se . Dueto t

he i ss ue 1 

### raised b y Ivy o n ap peal, it is n ecessary to discu ss grap hic facts invo lvin g th e mino r child .

I N T H E SUPR EM E C O UR T O F M I SS I SS I PPI

NO. 2 0 0 5 - KA- 0 2 3 0 3 - S CT M ICHAEL I VY v. STATE OFM

I SS I SS I PPI D A T E O F JU D G M E N T : 12/ 01/ 2005 TRI AL J UDG E: HON . J AM ES T. KI TCHE NS, J R. COURT F ROM W HI CH APP EAL ED: LOW NDES COUNTY CI RCUI T COURT ATT ORNEY F OR APP EL LANT: S TE VEN CARL W ALL ACE AT T OR NE Y F OR AP P E L L E E : OF F I CE OF T HE AT T OR NE Y GE NE RA L BY : BI LLY L. GO RE DI S T RI CT AT T OR NE Y: F OR RE S T AL L GOOD NAT UR E OF T HE CA S E : CR I M I NAL - F E L ONY D I SPO SI T I O N : A FFIRM E D - 02/ 22/ 2007 M OT I ON F OR RE HE AR I NG F I L E D: M ANDAT E I S S UE D:

B E F O R E SM I T H , C . J. , E A SL E Y A N D G R A V E S, JJ. EAS LEY, J UST I CE, FOR TH E COU RT: P ROCE DURAL HI S TORY ¶1. M i chae l I vy ( I vy) w as i ndi ct ed i n a tw o- count i ndi ctm ent – C ount I : engagi ng i n t he s exual batt ery of

A . B . , a chi l d undert he age of f our t een a nd/ ortw enty- f ourm onths younger than I vy, i n vi ol at i on of

M i s s . C ode A nn. § 97- 3- 95, and C ountI I : f ondl i ng A . B . , i n vi ol at i on of M i s s . C ode A nn. § 97- 5- 23. I vy r ecei ved a j ury tr i al i n the C i r cui tC our tof L ow ndes 1

### 2

C ounty, M i s s i s s i ppi . I vy w as convi ct ed of C ountI : s exual batt ery and C ountI I : f on dl i ng. A s t o Count I , I vy w as s ent ence d a s a ha bi tual of f endert o l i f

e i m pr i s onm enti n the cus t ody of t he M i s s i s s i pp i D e pa r t mentof Cor r e c t i on s a nd f

i ne d $ 10 , 00 0. A s t o Coun tI I , I vy w as s ent ence d t o s erve a t erm of f i f t een ye ar s i n the cus t ody of t he M i s s i s s i ppi D epart m entof C orr ect i ons t o run cons ecut i vel y w i th the s ent ence i n C ountI and f i ned $5, 000. T he tr i al courtor der ed thatt he se nt ence s i n C ountI and CountI I s hal l notbe r educe d ors us pended, n o r s h a ll th e d e fe n d a n t b e e lig ib le f o r p a ro le o r p ro b a tio n . Iv y n o w a p p e a ls to th is C o u rt, r ai s i ng the f

ol l ow i ng as s i gnm entof

er r or : w hethert he ver di ctw as agai ns tthe overw hel m i ng w ei ghtof

t he evi dence . FACTS ¶2 . O n J une 2, 2004, A . B . , a ge 1 3, a w ok e a ta pp r ox i mat e l y 3: 00 a. m . t o f i nd her s t e p f a th e r , I v y , wi th h i s h e a d b e twe e n h e rl e g s . A. B. t e s t i f i e d th a tI v y tr i e d t o s t i c k h i s th u mb i ns i de her , buts he r ol l ed overw hen he tr i ed. She s t at ed thatthe pai n caus ed by I vy t r yi ng t o s t i ck hi s thum b i n hercaus ed hert o w ake up. I vy s tuck hi s t ongue i ns i de hervagi na. ¶3. I vy had pul l ed her pant i es of f of her , and the pant i es w er e on the f l oor . I vy pul l ed up A .B .’s s h irt an d li c k e d h e r ch e st. A t th e ti m e , A .B . w a s in th e b e d ro o m th a t sh e sh a re d w ith heryoungers i s t er , w ho w as as l eep. A . B . t es t i f i ed thats he di d notscr eam beca us e s he w as a fra id o f Iv y b e c o m in g v io len t. A .B . tes tified th a t Iv y h a d b e e n v io len t w ith h e r m o th e r in the p ast. A . B . also test if ied th at sh e w as p o sit ive th at i t w as Iv y w h o li ck ed an d tou ch ed h er, beca us e s he coul d s ee hi s f ace . W hen he w as l i cki ng her , s he coul d s ee the t op of hi s f ace

### “ T. R.”is subs ti tut ed f or the c ousin’s nam e. 2 

### 3 and the bac k of

hi s he ad. A . B . ’ s t el evi s i on w as on i n herr oom atthe t i m e. I vy w as w ear i ng o n ly h is bo x ers (u n d erw ea r). ¶4. I vy t ol d A . B . not t o t el l her m other w hat happene d. A . B . t es t i f i ed that s he pul l ed her cover s overherhead a nd s t art ed cryi ng. A . B . t es t i f i ed thataf

t erI vy l ef

therr oom , he w ent t o th e b a th r o o m, a n d s h e h e a r d h i m ru n n i n g wa t e r . I v y t h e n w e n tt o h e rmo th e r ’ s r o o m. A . B . t es t i f

i ed t hat w hen herm othercame i nt o herr oom , s he di d nott el l herw hathad h ap p en ed . Instea d , A . B . told h er m o ther tha t she h ad a b ad d rea m ab o u t her g ran d m o ther. A f t erherm otherl ef

t , A . B . f el l as l eep. ¶5 . T h e n ex t m o rn in g , A .B . a g a in to ld h e r m o ther tha t no thing w as w ron g . A . B . ’s gr andmot hert ook hert o B i bl e s chool . A f t erB i bl e sc hool , A . B . , hergra ndm other , and her youngercous i n, T . R . , al l w entt o the gr ocery s t or e. A . B . conf i ded i n hercous i n w hathad 2 h ap p en ed to h er. T . R . told A . B . ’s un cle w h at ha d ha p p en ed , an d he t o ld A . B . ’s gra n d m o ther. A . B . ’ s gr andmot hert ol d he rmot her . A . B . s ubs equent l y s poke t o a pol i ce of f i ceraboutw hat had happe ned. ¶ 6 . On c r o s s - e x a mi n a t i o n , t h e d e f e n s e i n q u i r e d a s t o h o w A . B. k n e w t h a ti twa s 3 : 0 0 a . m. w h en Ivy ca m e into h er ro o m an d b eg an li ck ing h er. A . B . clarif ied th at sh e h ad an alarm cl ock i n herr oom and s he s aw thati tw as 3: 00 a. m . w hen s he w oke up. ¶7. I vy t es t i f

i ed that he w as 37 year s ol d at the t i m e of the tr i al . I vy had tw o pr i orf el ony c o n v ictio n s in M o n ro e C o u n ty , M iss iss ip p i, fo r th e sa le o f c o c a in e a n d se rv e d fiv e y e a rs in

### “C. D.”is use d to i dentif y A.B. ’s mot

her . 3 

### 4 pr i s on on thos e convi ct i ons . I vy t es t i f i ed thatA . B . made the al l egat i ons t o gethi m outof t he h o u se. Ivy t esti fi ed th at he w as u sing dru g s a few m o n ths be fore he m arried A . B . ’s m o ther. Ivy t est i fi ed thatthe m arr i age w as unh app y. Ivy t est i fi ed thathe st ayed aw ay fr om the h ou se s o as nott o be ar ound hi s s t epchi l dr en w hi l e he w as us i ng drugs . H e s t at ed thaton J une 2, 2 0 0 4 , h e wa s n o tu s i n g d ru g s a n d d i d n o th i n g t o A. B. ¶8. I vy t es t i f

i ed that on J une 2, 2004, he came hom e ar ound 2: 30 a. m . H e s t at ed thathe we n tth r o u g h th e h o u s e a n d c h e c k e d o n th e “ k i d s ” a n d ru b b e d th e m o n th e i rh e a d s . He t es t i f i ed thathe goti nt o bed atappr oxi m at el y 2: 36 a. m . and had s ex w i th hi s w i f e. H e s t at ed thathe then w entt o s l eep a nd s l eptunt i l hi s w i f e w oke hi m up as s he w as goi ng t o w or k. ¶9. A . B . ’s m o ther, C . D . , test i fi ed thatIvy m ov ed in w i th h er i n A pri l , and th ey w ere ma rr i e d i n M a y . T h e y l i v e d i n C a l e d o n i a , L o wn d e s Co u n ty , M i s s i s s i p p i . Ho we v e r , C. D. 3 s t at ed thatI vy w as har dl y t here ev en aft er they gotm arr i ed. A tni ght , I vy w as us ual l y not a th o me . I v y s t a y e d i n Amo r y , M i s s i s s i p p i , p r i ma r i l y , e v e n a f t e rth e y we r e ma rr i e d . C. D. t e s t i f i e d t h a to n J u n e 2 , 2 0 0 4 , I v y c a me i n t o th e b e d r o o m a t2 : 3 6 a . m. a n d wo k e h e ru p . C. D. s t at ed thatthe r oom w as dark w hen I vy w oke herup s o s he l ooked att he cl ock. I vy w ant ed t o have s ex, s o t hey had s ex. ¶ 1 0 . A fte r h e fin ish e d , sh e w e n t i n to h e r d a u g h ter s’ b e d ro o m . A .B . w a s so b b in g . A .B . to ld herthats he had a bad dr eam abouthe rgr andmot her . C . D . ’ s otherdaught erw as s t i l l as l eep. T he nextm orni ng, C . D . w entt o w or k fr om 7: 00 a. m . unt i l 9: 00 a. m . W hen s he ca m e home,

### 5

C . D . cooked br eakf

as tand saw herchi l dr en. I vy w as s t i l l ther e as l eep. A . B . t ol d hert hat n o th in g w a s w ro n g . C .D . h a d to b e b a c k at w o rk at 1 1 :0 0 a.m . a n d d id n o t retu rn h o m e u n til cl os e t o 8: 00 p. m . C . D . f ound no one at home w hen s he arr i ved. C . D . then r ece i ved a t el ephone c al l f

r om herbr other . A f

t ers peaki ng t o herbr other , C . D . cal l ed I vy and as ked wh a th e d i d t o A. B. I v y d e n i e d d o i n g a n y th i n g t o A. B. ¶11. I nves t i gat orTony Per ki ns of the Low ndes C ounty Sher i f f’ s D epart m ent i nves t i gat ed the al l egat i ons . I nves t i gat orPer ki ns s poke w i th A . B . ’ s uncl e and hi s son, T . R . I nves t i gat or Per ki ns s poke t o A . B . w i th heruncl e pr es ent . A . B . ’ s mot hera l r eady had bee n tr ans por t ed to th e h o sp ital b y a m b u lan c e . C .D . h a d b e c o m e u p se t u p o n lea rn in g w h a t h a d h a p p e n e d to h e r d a u g h ter . A .B . p ro v id e d a w ritten sta tem e n t. T h re e w e e k s la ter , Iv y w a s lo c a ted in M onr oe C ounty. I vy w as tr ans por t ed bac k t o L ow ndes C ounty. ¶12. B ef

or e ques t i oni ng I vy, I nves t i gat orPerki ns a dvi s ed hi m of hi s r i ght s , a nd I vy s i gned a w ai verof

hi s r i ght s . I nves t i gat orPerki ns t es t i f i ed thatI vy t ol d hi m thathe had done “ a l ot of drugs ” t hatni ghtand he di d t hi ngs he nor m al l y w oul d notdo. H e s t at ed that“he may have d o n e w h at h e w as accused o f and j ustno trem em ber i t , becau se of the d rugs. ” H ow ever, In v e stig a to r P e rk in s te stifie d th a t I v y d id n o t w a n t th o se th in g s in h is w ritten sta tem e n t. I nves t i gat orPer ki ns typed the s t at ementthatI vy s i gned. I n the s i gned s t at ement , I vy s t at ed in p e rtin e n t p a rt:

I gotm arr i ed on M ay 10th of thi s year . Shor t l y aft er t hat, I goton drugs . I w as r eal l y doi ng drugs abouta m onth bef or e I gotm arr i ed. I w as on cr ack a nd coca i ne.

### 6 I di d notdo anythi ng outof the w ay t o m y s t epdaught er . I may not r emem bereverythi ng thathappene d t hatni ght , butI do know thatI di d notdo an y thing w ron g w ith m y step d au g h ter. DI S CU S S I ON I . J. N . O . V . and W ei ght of t he E vi dence ¶1 3 . Ivy m ad e a p o st- tr ial m o ti o n fo r J.N . O . V , o r alterna ti v ely, a n ew tr ial . T h e tri al co u rt s ubs equent l y ent er ed i t s or derdenyi ng I vy’ s m ot i on f orJ . N . O . V . , oral t ernat i vel y, a new tr i al . O n appea l , I vy r ai s es onl y the i s s ue of w hether t he verdi ctw as agai ns tt he overw hel m i ng w ei ghtof the evi dence . H ow ever , I vy br i ef l y di s cus s es the s uf

f i ci ency of

t he evi dence i n t he cont extof hi s di s cus s i on of

the w ei ghtof

the evi dence . Si nce thi s C our thas tr i ed t o di s t i ngui s h the tw o i s s ues , w e w i l l addr es s the tw o as s epar at e and di s t i nct assig n m en ts of erro r. A. J . N. O. V. ¶ 1 4 . Iv y m a d e a p o s t- tr ia l m o tio n fo r J.N .O .V . T h e trial c o u rt su b se q u e n tly e n ter e d its or derdenyi ng Ivy’s m ot i on f orJ . N . O . V . A m ot i on f orJ . N . O . V . chal l enges the l egal s u f f ic ie n c y o f t h e e v id e n c e . Mc Cla in v. S ta te , 6 2 5 S o . 2 d 7 7 4 , 7 7 8 (M iss. 1 9 9 3 ). "[T ]his C our tpr oper l y r evi ew s the rul i ng on the l as toccas i on the ch al l enge w as m ade i n the tr i al cou rt . " Id . a t7 7 8 . He r e , th i s o c c u r r e d wh e n th e tr i a l c o u r td e n i e d I v y ’ s mo t i o n f o rJ . N. O. V. ¶15. I n B u sh v . S ta te , 895 So. 2d 836, 843 ( M i s s . 2005) , thi s C our t s et out the s t andar d of revi ew forl egal s uff

i ci ency as f

oll ow s: I n Ca rrv. S ta te , 20 8 S o . 2d 88 6 , 88 9 (M iss. 19 6 8 ), w e stated tha t i n cons i der i ng w hetherthe evi dence i s s uf f i ci entt o s us t ai n a convi ct i on i n the

### 7

f ace of a mot i on f

ordi r ect ed ver di ctorf orj udgm entnotw i ths t andi ng the ver dict , the c r i t i cal i nqui r y i s w hetherthe evi dence s how s “beyond a reas on able dou bt that accused c o m m it ted the actcharged , and that he di d so u n d er su ch c ir cu m stan ce s tha t ev ery e lem en t of the o ffen se e x ist ed ; and w h ere th e e v id e n c e fa ils to m e e t th is te s t it is in s u ff ic ie n t to s u p p o rt a c o n v ic tio n .” T he C our ts t at ed: Shoul d the f

act s and i nf

er ence s cons i der ed i n a cha l l enge t o the s uf f i ci ency of the evidence “po i nt i n favor of the defend ant on any el em ent o f t h e o ffen se w i th s uf f i ci entf or ce thatr eas onab l e men coul d nothave f ound beyond a r eas onabl e doubtthatthe def endantw as gui l ty, ” t he pr operre m edy i s forthe a p p e lla te c o u rt to re v e rs e a n d re n d e r. E dw a rds v . S ta te , 469 So. 2d 6 8, 70 ( M i s s . 1985) ( ci t i ng Ma y v. S ta te , 46 0 S o. 2d 77 8, 78 1 (M i ss. 19 84 )) ; see al so D y c u s v . S ta te , 875 So. 2d 140, 164 ( M i s s . 2004) . H ow ever , i f a r evi ew of

the evi dence r evea l s thati ti s of s uch qual i ty a nd w ei ghtthat , “ havi ng i n m i nd the beyond a r eas onabl e doubtbur den of pr oof s t andar d, r eas onabl e f

ai r - m i nded m en i n the exe r ci s e of

i m part i al j udgm entm i ghtr each di f f er entconcl us i ons on every el ementof

the of f ens e, ” the ev i dence w i l l be dee m ed t o have be en s u ff ic ie n t. E dw ar ds , 469 So. 2d at70. B u sh v. S ta te , 8 9 5 S o . 2 d a t 8 4 3 . ¶16. C ons i der i ng the evi dence i n the l i ghtm os tf avor abl e t o the St at e, w e f i nd ther e w as s uf f i ci entevi dence t o s uppor ta convi ct i on of s exual bat t ery and fondl i ng. M i s s . C ode A nn. § 9 7-3-95 (1), rel at i ng t o sexu al batt ery, provides: ( 1) A per s on i s gui l ty o f s exual batt ery i f

he ors he enga ges i n s exual penetr at i on w i th: (a ) A n o th e r p e rso n w ith o u t h is o r h e r c o n se n t; (b ) A m e n tally d e fe c tiv e , m e n tally in c a p a c itate d o r p h y sic a lly hel pl es s per s on; ( c) A chi l d atl eas tf

our t een ( 14) butunders i xt een ( 16) year s of age, i f t he per s on i s t hi r ty- s i x ( 36) ormore m onths ol derthan the chi l d; or

### 8 ( d) A chi l d underthe age of f our t een ( 14) year s of

age, i f the per s on i s tw enty- f

our( 24) ormore m onths ol derthan the chi l d. M i ss. C od e A nn . § 9 7-5-23, rel at i ng t o fond l i ng , provides: ( 1) A ny pe r s on above the age of ei ght een ( 18) year s , w ho, f orthe purpos e of gr at i f yi ng hi s orherl us t , or i nd ul gi ng hi s orherdepr aved l i cent i ous s exual des i r es , s hal l handl e, t ouch orrub w i th hands or any partof hi s or herbody or any mem berther eof

, any chi l d un der t he age of s i xt een ( 16) year s , w i th or w i thoutthe chi l d' s cons ent , ora ment al l y def ect i ve, m ent al l y i ncapa ci t at ed or p h y sicall y h elpless p e rso n as d efine d in S ec ti o n 9 7 -3-9 7 , sh all b e g u il ty o f a f el ony and, upon convi ct i on ther eof , s hal l be f

i ned i n a sum notl es s t han O ne T h o u san d D o ll ars ($ 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 ) no r m o re tha n F ive T h o u san d D o ll ars ( $5, 000. 00) , orbe comm i t t ed t o the cus t ody of the St at e D epart m entof C orr ect i ons notl es s t han t w o (2) year s nor m or e t han f i f t een ( 15) year s , orbe p u n ish e d b y b o th su c h fin e a n d im p riso n m e n t, at th e d isc re tio n o f th e c o u rt. ( 2) A ny per s on above t he age of ei ght een ( 18) year s , w ho, fort he purpos e of gr at i f yi ng hi s orhe rl us t , ori nd ul gi ng hi s orhe rde pr a ve d l i c e nt i ou s s e xu al des i r es , s hal l handl e, t ouch orrub w i th ha nds ora ny pa r tof hi s orherbody or any mem berther eof

, any chi l d youngerthan hi m s el f orher s el f

and underthe age of ei ght een ( 18) ye ar s w ho i s nots uch per s on' s s pous e, w i th orw i thoutthe chi l d' s c ons ent , w hen the per s on oc cupi es a pos i t i on of trus torauthor i ty over the chi l d s hal l be gui l ty of a f el ony and, upon convi ct i on ther eof , s hal l be f

i ned i n a s um notl es s than O ne Thousand D ol l ar s ($1, 000. 00) norm or e than Fi ve T h o u sa n d D o llars ($ 5 ,0 0 0 .0 0 ), o r b e c o m m itt e d to th e c u sto d y o f th e S tate D epart m entof

C orr ect i ons notl es s than tw o ( 2) year s n or m or e than f i f t een ( 15) year s , orbe puni s hed by both s uch f i ne an d i m pr i s onm ent , atthe d isc re tio n o f th e co u rt. A p e rso n in a p o sitio n o f tru st o r au th o rity o v e r a c h ild in c lu d e s w ith o u t lim ita tio n a c h ild ' s te a c h e r, c o u n s e lo r, p h y s ic ia n , p sy c h iatris t, ps ychol ogi s t , m i ni s t er , pr i es t , phys i cal ther api s t , chi r opr act or , l egal guar di an, par ent , s t eppar ent , aunt , uncl e, s coutl eade rorcoac h. ¶17. T her e i s no need t o r es t at e the f act s i n gr eatde t ai l thata r e pr ovi ded i n the f act s s ect i on of the opi ni on. A . B . t es t i f i ed thatI vy l i cked here veryw her e, i ncl udi ng be tw een herl egs and h e r c h e st. Iv y p e n e tra ted A .B .’s v a g in a w ith h is to n g u e . Iv y p u lled o ff A .B .’s p a n ties in o rd e r to fo n d le a n d lick h e r. H e p u lled u p h e r sh irt to lic k h e r c h e st. H e tried to in se rt h is

### 9

th u mb i n s i d e A. B. A. B. wa s th i r t e e n y e a r s o l d a tth e t i me , a n d I v y wa s h e rs t e p f a th e r . A. B. w as abl e t o s ee I vy’ s f

ace w hen he w as l i cki ng her , and A . B . i dent i f i ed I vy i n courtf

ort he r e c o r d a s th e ma n wh o h a d p e r f o r me d th o s e a c t s o n h e r . A. B. wa s a f r a i d I v y wo u l d b e c o me vi ol enti f s he t ol d herm otherors cr eamed f orhel p. ¶18. I vy ar gues thatther e w er e i ncons i s t enci es betw een A . B . ’s st at em ents m ade t o l aw enf or cementof

f i ci al s and hert es t i m ony a ttr i al . I vy s t at es thatno exhi bi t s w er e i ntr oduced attr i al t o pr ove hi s gui l t . I vy ar gues thatther e w er e i ncons i s t enci es r egar di ng the t i m e that the al l eged conduc toccurr ed. T he j ury hear d t es t i m ony fr om A . B . and t he def endant , I vy, as t o the al l egat i ons . T he j ury als o hear d f r om A . B . ’ s m other , C . D . T he def ens e had the oppor tuni ty t o cr os s - exami ne A . B . as t o any di s cr epanc i es i n hers t at ement s and t es t i m ony. ¶19. D es pi t e any dis crepancies in t he w i t nesses ’ t es t i m ony, the j ury w as l ef tw i th the resp o n sibil ity to w eigh the c red ibil ity o f the se w itn esse s’ t esti m o n y at tri al. A s this C o u rt h a s re p e a te d ly h e ld , th e ju ry is th e fi n a l a rb ite r o f a w itn e s s ' s c re d ib ility . Mo rg a n v. S ta te , 6 8 1 S o . 2 d 8 2 , 9 3 (M iss . 1 9 9 6 ); see al so S p ice r v . S ta te , 9 2 1 S o . 2 d 2 9 2 , 3 1 2 (M iss. 2 0 0 6 ). I n S p ice r v . S ta te , 921 So. 2d at311 ( quot i ng Fra n k lin v. S ta te , 67 6 S o. 2d 28 7, 28 8 (M i ss. 1996) ) , thi s C our ts t at ed: M att ers re g a rd ing the w eigh t and cre d ibil ity to b e a cc o rde d the e v iden ce are t o be r es ol ved by the j ury. [ T hi s C our t ] m ay r ever s e onl y w her e, w i th r es pect t o one ormore of

the el ement s of

the of f ens e char ged, the evi den ce so cons i der ed i s s uch thatr eas onabl e and f ai r - m i nded j ur or s coul d onl y f i nd the acc us ed notgui l ty. ¶20. C ons i der i ng the evi dence i n the l i ght m os t f avor abl e t o the St at e, ther e w as s uf f i ci ent evi dence t o convi ctI vy of s exual batt ery and f

ondl i ng. A ccor di ngl y, w e f i nd thatthe tr i al

### 10

courtdi d noterri n denyi ng I vy’ s m ot i on f orJ . N . O . V . T hi s ass i gnm entof err ori s w i thout m e rit. B . N ew T ri al ¶21. A m ot i on fornew t r i al chal l enges the w ei ghtof the evi dence . Sh e

ffie ld v. S ta te , 749 S o . 2 d 12 3 , 12 7 (M iss. 19 9 9 ). A reve rsal is w arran ted o n ly i f th e tr ial co u rtab u se d its d is c re tio n in d e n y in g a m o tio n fo r n e w tr ia l. Id . I n B u sh , 895 So. 2d at844, thi s C our ts et ou tthe st and ard of r eview forw ei gh tof the ev i den ce as f oll ow s: W h e n re v iew in g a d e n ial o f a m o tio n fo r a n e w trial b a se d o n a n o b jec tio n to the w eigh t of th e e v iden ce , w e w il l on ly d istu rb a v erd ictw h en itis so c o n tr ary to th e o v e rw h e lm in g w e ig h t o f th e e v id e n c e th a t to a llo w it to sta n d w o u ld s a n c tio n a n u n c o n s c io n a b le in ju s tic e . He rr in gv. S ta te , 691 So. 2d 948, 957 ( M i s s . 1997) . W e have s t at ed thaton a mot i on f ornew tr i al , the courts i t s as a thi r t eenth j ur or . The mot i on, how ever , i s a ddr es s ed t o the di s cr et i on of the court , w hi ch s houl d be exe r ci s ed w i th caut i on, and the pow ert o granta new tr i al s houl d be i nvoked onl y i n exce pt i on al cases i n w hi ch the evi dence p re p o n d e ra tes h e a v ily ag a in st th e v e rd ict . A m ike rv. D r ugs ForLes s, I nc ., 796 So. 2d 942, 947 ( M i s s . 2000) . H ow ever , the evi dence s houl d be w ei ghed in th e lig h t m o s t f

a v o r a b le t o t h e v e rd ic t. He r r ing , 6 9 1 S o . 2 d a t 9 5 7 . A r ever s al on the gr ounds thatthe ver di ctw as agai ns tthe overw hel m i ng w ei ght of the evi dence , “unli ke a r ever s al bas ed on i ns uf f i ci entevi dence , does not m ean thatacqui t t al w as the onl y pr operver di ct . ” Mc Q u e e n v. S ta te , 423 So. 2 d 8 0 0 , 8 0 3 (M iss . 1 9 8 2 ). R a th e r, a s th e “ th irtee n th ju ro r,” th e c o u rt sim p ly d is a g re e s w ith th e ju ry ' s re s o lu tio n o f t h e c o n fl ic tin g te s tim o n y . Id . T h is di f f er ence of opi ni on does nots i gni f y acqui t t al any m or e than a di s agr eement a m o n g th e ju ro rs th e m s e lv e s . Id . I nst ead, t he pr operre m edy i s t o gr anta new trial. ¶2 2 . W ith o u t r e-d iscu ssing the testi m o n y alread y stat ed w ith in th is op inion , the ju ry h ea rd the t es t i m ony f

r om al l the St at e’ s w i tnes s es , i ncl udi ng the def ens e’ s cr os s - exami nat i on of thos e w i tnes s es . A . B . t es t i f i ed i n gr aphi c det ai l as t o the l i cki ng and t ouchi ng thats he endur ed f

r om Ivy. I vy exer ci s ed hi s ri ghtt o t es t i f y, and t es t i f

i ed thathe di d nothi ng w r ong

### 11

t o A . B . I vy t es t i f

i ed thatA . B . j us tw ant ed hi m outof the hous e. I nves t i gat orPer ki ns t es t i f i ed r egardi ng w hatI vy s t at ed i n hi s w r i t t en s t at ementas w el l as s t at ement s I vy m ade thathe di d notw anti n the w r i t t en s t at ement . A f t ercons i der i ng the evi dence pr es ent ed, the j ury r eturned a c onvi ct i on agai ns tI vy f ors exual batt ery and f

ondl i ng. ¶23. H er e, no new tr i al i s w arr ant ed, as the j ury’ s ver di ct i s cons i s t ent w i th the w ei ghtof the evi dence . Si t t i ng as the “thi r t eenth j ur or , ” w e f i nd thatthe evi dence w ei ghed i n the l i ght m os tf avor abl e t o the ver di cts upport s t he j ury' s r es ol ut i on of the conf

l i ct i ng t es t i m ony. A c c o rd in g ly , the trial c o u rt d id n o t er r in d e n y in g Iv y ’s m o tio n fo r a n e w trial. CO NC L US I ON ¶24. Forthe f

or egoi ng reasons, the j udgm entof the C i r cui tC our tof

L ow ndes C ount y, M i s s i s s i ppi , i s af

f i r m ed. ¶ 2 5 . COUNT I : CONV I CT I ON OF S EXUAL BATTERY A S A HA BI TUAL OF F E ND E R A ND S E NT E NC E OF L I F E I M P RI S ON M E NT I N T HE CU S T OD Y O F T H E M I SSISSIPP I D E P A R T M E N T O F C O R R E C T I O N S A N D A F I N E O F $10, 000, AFF I RM ED. COUNT I I : CONVI CT I ON OF F ONDL I NG AS A HAB I TU AL OF F E ND E R A ND S E NT E NC E OF F I F T E E N ( 1 5 ) YE AR S I N T HE CU S T OD Y O F T H E M I SSISSIP P I D E P A R T M E N T O F C O R R E C T I O N S A N D A F I N E O F $5, 000, AF F I RMED . S AI D S E NT E NC E S S HA L L NO T B E RE DU CE D, S US P E ND E D, NO R S HA L L T HE AP P E L L AN T B E E L I GI B L E F OR P AR OL E OR P RO BA TI ON. S E NT E NC E I N C OU NT I I S HA L L RU N C ON S E CU T I VE L Y WI T H T HE S E N T E N C E IN C O U N T I. S M I T H, C . J . , W A L L E R A N D C OB B , P . J J . , D I A Z , C A R L S ON , D I C KI N S ON AND RA NDOL P H, J J . , CONCUR. GRAVE S , J . , CONCURS I N RE S UL T ONL Y.