I N T H E SUPR EM E C O UR T O F M I SS I SS I PPI NO. 2 0 1 0 - KA- 0 1 1 2 6 - S CT RO Y MI L TON P AG E
v. STATE OFM

I SS I SS I PPI
D A T E O F JU D G M E N T : 01/ 26/ 2010 TRI AL J UDG E: HON
. ROBER T B. HEL F RI CH COURT F ROM W HI CH APP EAL ED: F ORRES T COUNTY CI RCUI T COURT A TTO RN EY S FO R A PPELL A N T: O FFI CE O F I N D I G EN T A PPEA LS BY : J US T I N T AYL OR CO OK LESL I E S. LEE AT T OR NE YS 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 : W
. G LEN N W A TTS SCOTT STUA RT DI STRI CT A TTOR NEY : PATRI CI A B UR CH ELL 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 - 06/ 30/ 2011 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 W A L L E R , C . J. , L A M A R A N D P I E R C E , JJ. PI ERCE, J UST I CE, FOR TH E COU RT: ¶1
. O n N o v e m b e r 5 , 2 0 0 8 , O fficer T im o thy S lade arrive d a t 3 0 1 M c S w a in S tre e t, H at t i es bu r g, i n r e s po ns e t o a 9 11 c a l l
. A tthe s c e ne , Sl a de o bs e r ve d a mal e s i t t i ng i n t he dr i ver ’ s s eatof

a K i a Sor ent o, f

aci ng f orw ar d. The vi ct i m , Ray Spi l l m an, ( “Spi l l m an”) , w as
s uf f er i ng f r om a guns hotw ound t o the l ef ts i de of hi s head a nd di d notappeart o be b r e a th i n g . S l a d e a l s o o b s e r v e d th a tth e d r i v e r ’ s s i d e wi n d o w wa s s h a t t e r e d i n o n th e v i c t i m, i ndi cat i ng thatthe w i ndow had bee n up w hen Spi l l m an w as s hot
. A f t eradvi s i ng di s pat chT h e B u re a u o f F o re n sic S e rv ic e s (“ B F S ” ) w a s c re a te d th ro u g h a $ 2 m illio n g ra n t t o th e U n iv e rs ity 1 o f S o u th ern M is si ssi p p i
. T h e B F S w as a coll ab o rat i o n be t w een F o rr est , L am ar and P err y co u n t y sheri ff’s off i ces , t he Fo r r es t G ener al H ospi t al poli ce, t he So ut her n M i ss poli ce, and t he H at t i es bu r g and P et al poli ce d e p a rtm e n ts to in v e stig a te c rim e sc e n e s. J e ss ie B a ss , Fore ns i c Se r v i c e s G r oup t o D is band , T h e H atti es b u rg A m erica n (M ay 3 1 , 2 0 1 1 ). 

### 2 thatan ambul ance w as ne eded, Sl ade, a l ong w i th otherof f i cer s w ho had arr i ved, s epar at ed the w itn e ss e s in to se p ara te ve h icl es u n ti l th eir st atem en ts co u ld b e tak en . C assa n d ra Spi l l m an ( “C as s andr a”) , a w i tnes s on the s cene , i dent i f i ed the man i n the ca ras herhus band, Spi l l m an. A notherw i tnes s on the s cene i dent i f i ed the s hoot eras R oy Page and t ol d Sl ade that P a g e h a d ru n a w a y fr o m th e c ri m e s c e n e . C a s s a n d ra is a ls o P a g e ’s s is te r. ¶2. D et ect i ve Eri c Pr oul x, w hi l e i n r out e t o the cr i m e s cene , w as a dvi s ed by di s pat ch that th e sh o o ter h a d b e e n sp o tted a t 1 1 0 9 D e a so n A v e n u e , so h e c h a n g e d h is c o u rse to h e lp w ith the appr ehensi on o f the s us pect . A s he pul l ed up atD eas on A venue, Pr oul x s aw O f f i cer Syber tpl aci ng Page i n handcuf f s . W hi l e he w as bei ng handcuf f ed, Pr oul x hear d Page s ay, “I di d i t . I tw as s el f

- def ens e. ” A f

t erPage w as pl ace d underar r es tt he of f i cer s on the s cene of the arr es t , r ecove r ed a ni ne- m i l l i m et erhandgun thatw as l yi ng on the gr ound and one
ro u n d o f n in e -m illim e te r a m m u n itio n fr o m P a g e ’s le ft p o c k e t. ¶3. J ef

f B yr d, an i nvest i gatorw i t h t he B ur eau of For ens i c Servi ces , w as cal l ed t o the
s cene of the s hoot i ng t o i nves t i gat e. B yr d and hi s t eam bega n t o phot ogr aph the s cene . O ne 1
o f th e p ictu res o f th e sc en e sh o w s tha t th e fro n t pas sen g er d o o r w as left op e n . T h e p ictu re al s o s how s the hous e l ocat ed at301 M cSw ai n St r eetbehi nd the K i a, w i th the couc h on t he fron t po rch
. In a n o ther p h o tog rap h , a ciga rett e li g h ter is sh o w n in S p il lm an ’s ri g h t han d
. In
a d d iti o n to tak in g th e p h o to g ra p h s, B y rd a n d h is t e a m a lso fo u n d a n in e -m ill im e ter sh e ll
c a s i n g . T h e s h e l l c a s i n g wa s l o c a t e d o n th e g r o u n d , s e v e r a l f e e tf r o m th e l e f

tr e a rt i r e . At

### 3

no poi nti n thei ri nves t i gat i on di d B yr d orhi s t eam f i nd a w eapon i n Spi l l m an’ s vehi cl e or on hi s per s on. ¶ 4
. D r. S tac i T u rn e r, th e S tate ’s fo re n sic p a th o lo g ist, ru led S p ill m a n ’s ca u se o f d e a th to be a guns hotw ound t o t he hea d. S he fur t her t es t i f i ed thatthe mannerof

hi s death w as h o m icid e . W h e n c ro ss -e x a m in e d a t trial b y P a g e ’s a tto rn e y , D r. T u rn e r te stifie d th a t, w h ile
s he w as notabl e t o det erm i ne how f araw ay the gun w as f

r om Spi l l m an’ s head w hen i tw as f i r ed, s he w as abl e t o det erm i ne thatt he gun had been ei therm or e t han t hr ee f eetaw ay f

r om Spi l l man’ s h e a d ortha ta n ob j e c th a d be e n i nt e rpo s e d be tw e e n the e nd o f the gun a nd Spi l l m an’ s head w hen the gun w as f i r ed. D r . T urneral s o t es t i f i ed thatthe si de gl as s w i ndow
o f a c a r c o u ld b e c o n s id e re d a n in te rp o s e d ta rg e t. ¶5. L or i B eal l , a f

or ens i c s ci ent i s t f

or the M i s s i s s i ppi C r i m e L abor at ory w ho s peci al i zes i n f i r earm s and t ool
- m ark i dent i f i cat i on, conf

i r m ed thatthe bul l etthatki l l ed Spi l l m an had
c o m e fr o m P a g e ’s g u n . ¶6. C har l es D ykes , t he ow ner of D i s count Paw n, t es t i f i ed that Page had pur chas ed the ni ne- m i l l i m et ergun f

r om hi s s hop. H e i dent i f i ed the r ece i ptf

r om the pur chas e and mat ched the s er i al num berof the gun fr om t he r ece i ptt o t he se r i al num berof the gun r ecove r ed by the p o lic e . T h e d a te o n th e re c e ip t is O c to b e r 1 7 , 2 0 0 8
. ¶ 7
. A t trial, P a g e tes tified th a t fric tio n h a d e x iste d b e tw e e n S p ill m a n a n d h im se lf, m o stly ste m m in g fro m P a g e ’s b e lief th a t S p illm a n w a s a b u sin g C a ss a n d ra . H e a lso tes tified th a t, thr ee t o f ourw eeks bef

or e t he s hoot i ng, he and Spi l l m an had be en i n a phys i cal al t er cat i on. A tthe t i m e of

t he al t er cat i on, t hey had been at301 M cSw ai n S tr eet , Page’ s m other ’ s hous e. A s Page w as s i t t i ng atthe f r ontdoor, S pi l l m an had com e i n and pushed hi m and cha l l enged

### 4

hi m. Sp i l l man the n ha d w a l ke d c l os e t o Pa ge ’ s c a rwi th a r a z ori n hi s hand. Page, ant i ci pat i ng thatSp i l l m an w as aboutt o damage hi s car , had gr abbed a s t i ck and c has ed S p ill m a n fo r a b o u t a b lo c k . P a g e th e n h a d p u t d o w n h is s tick a n d tw o o f th e m h a d b e g u n to fi gh t . D uri ng the fi gh t , Pag e had bee n cut w i th the razor and needed t o hav e thirty st i t ches. A s h e w a s le a v in g , P a g e c la im s th a t S p illm a n h a d to ld h im th a t h e w a s g o in g to k ill h im
. ¶ 8
. P a g e tes tified th a t, se v e ra l d a y s a ft e r th e f ir s t v io len t alte rc a tio n , h e h a d g o n e to D i s countPaw n i n Pea r l , M i s s i s s i pp i , a ndha d pur chas ed the H i gh Poi ntni ne- m i l l i m et erpi s t ol thatw as us ed t o ki l l Spi l l m an. H e f ur thert es t i f

i ed thathe had pur chas ed hol l ow -poi nt b u llets f o r th e g u n fro m W a l-M a rt. ¶9. P age then tes t i fi ed that , on N ov em ber 5, 200 8, he h ad g on e t o L et i ci a C ars on ’s ho use to fi n d S p il lm an so the tw o o f th em co u ld talk an d m ak e the si tuation b etw ee n them b ett er. O n cr os s - exami nat i on, P age admi t t ed t o havi ng had hi s gun on hi s per s on w hen he arr i ved atC ar s on’ s hous e. Spi l l m an w as notatC ar s on’ s house. A f t erl eavi ng C ar s on’ s hous e, Page d ro v e to h is m o th e r’s h o u se , the n to a b a r d o w n th e stre e t. A fte r a fe w b e e rs, h e sta rte d to
w al k t o hi s aunt ’ s hous e. I n r out e t o hi s aunt ’ s hous e, Page t es t i f i ed thathe w as att acke d by Spi l l m an and a f

ew of Spi l l m an’ s fr i ends
. Page cl ai m ed thatthe men pushe d hi m dow n and
s t art ed ki cki ng hi m . H e f ur thert es t i f

i ed thatSpi l l m an had ki cked hi m i n the s t om ach. Page t es t i f i ed that , as a r es ul tof

the att ack, he had vom i t ed and ha d a bl oody m outh. A f t ert he
a tta c k , P a g e w e n t b a c k to th e b a r, g o t in h is c a r a n d d ro v e to h is m o th e r’ s h o u s e . ¶10. O nce athi s m other ’ s hous e, Page s aton the couc h thatw as l ocat ed on the f r ont por ch. H ow ever , bef

or e l eavi ng, Page w entand gr abbed hi s gun f r om hi s c ara nd s atback dow n on the couc h. Fi f

t een ortw enty mi nut es l at er , Spi l l m an and C as s andr a pul l ed up. Page t es t i f i ed

### 5

thatC as s andr a ent er ed the hous e, cl osi ng the doorbehi nd her
. O nce s he w as i ns i de, Page cl ai m ed thatSpi l l m an s ai d t o hi m “W hat ’ s up, you punk ass bit ch. ” T hen, Page w al ked to w a rd th e c a r to let h im k n o w “ th a t th e situ a tio n w a sn ’t a b o u t n o th in g a n d it w o u ld b e a ll
r i ght
. ” A s he appr oache d the vehi cl e he saw S pi l l m an r eac h overt o the r i ghtand s aw
s om ethi ng m et al l i c r ef

l ect i ng i n the l i ght
. Fear i ng thatSpi l l m an had a gun, P age “ba cked up
a n d I p u lled m y g u n o u t o f m y p o c k e t. A n d w h e n I p u lled it o u t o f m y p o c k e t, I co c k e d it. A n d w h e n I co ck ed it , I j u st sho t and start ed run n ing
. ” P ag e c lai m ed that h e w as m e re ly tryi ng t o di s tr actSpi l l m an s o t hatSpi l l m an w oul d nots hoothi m . A f t ers hoot i ng Spi l l m an, P a g e w e n t to F re d ri c k B u rn s ’s h o u s e . ¶ 1 1
. At tr i a l , Bu r n s t e s t i f i e d th a t o n No v e mb e r 5 , 2 0 0 8 , h e wa s a t h o me a r o u n d 8 : 0 0 p . m.
w hen Page knocked on hi s door
. W hen B urns ope ned the door , Page i m m edi at el y st ar t ed talk in g to h im . B u rn s s tate d th a t P a g e h a d to ld h im th a t h e h a d co m e to B u rn s’s h o u se to k ill hi m , butthathe had cha nged hi s m i nd. H e then w enton t o s ay thathe had s hots om eone a nd thatthe per s on w as dead. O nce Burns w as abl e t o gett he gun aw ay f r om P age, he cal l ed the pol i ce. ¶12. C as s andr a’ s t es t i m ony at tr i al var i es f r om that of her br other
. I n des cr i bi ng the f i ght thathad happened s ever al w eeks pr i ort o Spi l l m an’ s death, C as s andr a s t at ed thatPage had gr abbed s om ethi ng thatl ooked l i ke ei theran ax ors hov el an d t hen had chas ed Spi l l m an dow n the s tr eet . She then s t at ed that“w hen he s w ung, i f m y husband w oul dn’ thave duc ked, i tw oul d ha ve c uth i s h e a d of f
. ” The f i gh th a d e nd e d w he n Pa ge f e l l t o the g r ou nd a nd Spi l l m an cutPage s om ew her e on hi s hand.

### 6

¶13. C as s andr a’ s t es t i m on y again vari es f r om that of her br other ’ s w hen des cr i bi ng t he event s on t he ni ghtof N ovember5, 2008. C as s andr a t es t i f i ed t hatas s he w as appr oachi ng herm other ’ s f

r ontdoor , Page had al r eady got t en of f of the couch and ha d gr i nned athi s s i s t er as he w al ked pas ther
. She t ol d hi m “D on’ tgo m es s i ng w i th m y hus band. ” She f ur ther tes tified th a t, as sh e w a s w a lk in g p a st h im , itlo o k e d lik e h e w a s fix in g h is s h irt in sid e o f h is pant s . B y the t i m e C as s andr a had r eac hed the f r ontdoor , s he s aw Page goi ng back on t he d ri v er’s side o f the K ia. A s C assa n d ra s too d in the d o o rw ay talking to h er m o ther, she h ea rd a guns hot
. C as s andr a r an outt o the ca rand s ai d t o Page, “ Y ou done s hotmy husband. ” Page then t ook of

f runni ng. C as s andr a t es t i f i ed thats he di d nothe ara ny conver s at i on betw een the tw o m en and ex plai ned thatthe dr i ver ’ s w i ndow w as up and thatSpi l l m an w as s t i l l on the phone. ¶ 1 4
. A fte r b o th th e S tate a n d th e P a g e re ste d th e ir c a se s, th e ju ry m e m b e rs w e re g iv e n th e ir i ns truct i on s. I ncl uded i n thei ri ns truct i ons w er e an i ns truct i on f orm ans l aught erand an i ns truct i on f

ors el f
- def ens e. T he j ury found Page gui l ty of mur der , and the j udge s ent ence d h im to lif

e in p ri s o n . P a g e n o w a p p e a ls
.

S TATEM ENT OF THE I S S UES I . W h e th e r th e e v id e n c e is s u ff ic ie n t t o s u p p o r t t h e v e r d ic t. I I . W he t he r t he ve r di c t i s ag ai ns t t he ov e r whel m i ng wei ght of t he e v id e n c e . III . W h ether the o verw h el m i n g w ei gh t of the eviden ce sup p orts a c o n v ic ti o n o f m a n s la u g h te r . I V . W het her t he W eat hers by r u le a p p lie s . ¶15. D ue t o t he s i m i l ar i t i es of i s s ues II a n d II I, t h e y w ill b e d is c u s s e d to g e th e r.

### 7 A N A L Y S IS I. W h eth er th e e v ide n ce is sufficien t to su p p o rt th e v er d ict. ¶16. W hen a c hal l enge a r i s es w i th r egar d t o the s uf f i ci ency of

the evi dence , “the cr i t i cal i nqui ry i s w hetherthe evi dence s how s ‘ beyond a r eas onabl e doubtthatthe ac cus ed
comm i t t ed the ac tc har ged, and thathe di d s o underci r cumst ance s thatevery el ementof t he
o ffe n se e x iste d ; an d w h e re th e e v id e n c e fa ils to m e e t th is te st it is in su ffic ien t to m e e t a convi ct i on. ’ ” B u sh v. S ta te , 895 So. 2 d 83 6, 8 43 (M i s s . 2005) ( quot i ng Ca rrv. S ta te , 208 So. 2d 886, 889 ( M i s s . 1968) )
. I n det erm i ni ng i f the evide nce i s s uf

f i ci entt o s uppor tt he
v erd ict , the c ri ti ca l qu ery bef or e the C our ti s “w hether , af t ervi ew i ng the evi dence i n the l i ght
m os tf avor abl e t o the pr os ecut i on, a ny r at i onal tr i erof f actc oul d ha ve f

ound the ess ent i al el ement s of

the cr i m e beyond a r eas onabl e doubt
. ” J o n e s v . S ta te , 39 S o. 3d 86 0, 86 7 (M i ss. 2010) ( ci t i ng Mo rr is v . S ta te , 9 2 7 S o . 2 d 7 4 4 , 7 4 8 (M is s . 2 0 0 6 ))
. ¶17. I ti s i m por t antt o not e thatthi s r evi ew does notr equi r e the C our tt o ask it self w h ethe r it

b e liev e s th a t th e e v id e n c e a t th e trial e sta b lish e d g u ilt beyond a r eas onabl e doubt
. I ns t ead, t he rel evantques t i on i s w hether , af t er vi ew i ng t he evi dence i n the l i ghtm ostf avor abl e t o the pr os ecut i on, any r a t i o n a l t r i e rof

f a c tc o u l d h a v e f

o u n d th e e s s e n t i a l e l e me n t s o f th e c r i me b e y o n d a re a s o n a b le d o u b t. B u sh , 895 So. 2d at843 ( quot i ng J a c k s o n v . V

ir g in ia , 443 U
. S. 307, 315, 99 S. C t . 2781, 6 1 L . E d . 2 d 5 6 0 ( 1 9 7 9 ) (c itatio n s o m itt e d ) (e m p h a sis in o rig in a l). If th e C o u rt sh o u ld d e ter m in e th a t th e fa c ts a re n o t su ffic ien t to su p p o rt th e v e rd ict, th e n th e “ p ro p e r re m e d y is f orthe appe l l at e courtt o r ever s e and r ender
. ” B u sh , 895 So. 2d at843. ¶18. I n r evi ew i ng the evi dence i n the l i ghtmostf avor abl e t o the prosecut i on , w e fi nd
s uf f i ci entevi dence t o convi ctPage of m ur der
. M i s s i s s i ppi C ode Sect i on 97- 3- 19( 1) ( a)

### 8

s t at es : “the ki l l i ng of

a human bei ng w i t houtthe author i ty of l aw by any means ori n any
m anners hal l be murde ri n t he f ol l ow i ng cas es : ( a) w hen done w i th del i ber at e des i gn t o ef f ect the dea th of the per s on ki l l ed, or of any hum an bei ng. . . . M i s s . C ode A nn. § 97- 3- 19( 1) ( a) (R e v . 2 0 0 6 ). ¶ 1 9
. T h e p h y sic a l e v id e n c e p re se n ted b y th e S tate in d ica ted th a t S p ill m a n w a s sittin g in hi s car , w i th hi s w i ndow up, fa ci ng forw ar d, w hen he w as shot
. Page t es t i f i ed thathe s hot Spi l l m an i n s el f

- def ens e af t erhe bel i eved thatSpi l l m an w as reachi ng fora w eapon. C as s andr a t es t i f

i ed that , s ever al w eeks pr i ort o the s hoot i ng, Page and Spi l l m an had be en i nvol ved i n a vi ol entf

i ghti n w hi ch Page ha d gr abbed s om ethi ng l i ke a s hovel oran ax and had cha s ed Spi l l m an dow n t he s tr eet . C as s andr a f ur thert es t i f

i ed that , on the ni ghtof t he
m ur der , as she ha d appr oache d the doorof herm other ’ s hous e, as Page had w al ked pas s ed her , i thad l ooked l i ke Page w as f i xi ng hi s shi r ti ns i de of

hi s pant s . C as s andr a then s aw Page go t o the dr i ver ’ s s i de of the K i a. E xpert s t es t i f

i ed thatthe gun us ed t o ki l l Spi l l m an w as t he gun r ecove r ed f

r om Page w hen he w as arr es t ed. ¶2 0. I tw as t he dut y of t he j ury t o r e c on c i l e the t e s t i mony wi th the ph ys i c a l e vi de nce p re s e n te d in d e lib e ra tio n . ¶21. T her ef

or e, i n cons i der i ng the evi dence i n the l i ght m os t f avor abl e t o the pr os ecut i on, th is C o u rt fi n d s th a t th e e v id e n c e w a s s u ff ic ie n t to s u p p o rt a v e rd ic t o f m u rd e r. I I . a nd I I I . W het her t he ve r di c t i s ag ai ns t t he o ve r whel m i ng wei ght of

th e e v id e n c e . ¶22. “W hen r evi ew i ng a deni al of a m ot i on f or a new tr i al bas ed on an obj ect i on t o t he
w ei ghtof

the evi dence , w e w i l l onl y di s turb a ver di ctw hen i ti s s o contr ary t o t he

### 9

overw hel m i ng w ei ghtof the evi dence thatt o al l ow i tt o s t and w oul d s anct i on an
un c on s c i on a bl e j us t i c e. ” B u sh , 8 95 S o. 2d at844. I n det erm i ni ng i f the w ei ghtof

t he
e v id e n c e su p p o rts th e v e rd ict, th e C o u rt w e ig h s th e ev id e n c e in th e li g h t m o st fa v o ra b le to th e v e rd ic t. B u sh , 895 So. 2d at844. “The m ot i on i s addr es s ed t o the s ound di s cr et i on of t he
court ; a new tr i al s houl d be gr ant ed onl y i n exce pt i onal cas es w hen the evi dence pr eponder at es heavi l y agai ns tthe ver di ct . ” B u sh , 895 So. 2d at84 4 (quot i ng A m ikerv. D r ugs For Less, I

nc. , 7 9 6 S o . 2 d 9 4 2 , 9 4 7 (M is s . 2 0 0 0 ))
. ¶23. Page ar gues that the m ur der convi ct i on w as agai ns t the overw hel m i ng w ei ght of t he evi dence
. Page f

ur thera r gues that“ the overw hel m i ng w ei ght of the evi dence es t abl i s hed thatPage shotSpi l l m an i n nece s s ary s el f
- def ens e” or , i n the al t ernat i ve, thatt he “overw hel m i ng w ei ghtof the evi dence s uppor t s Page’ s convi ct i on f orm ans l aught err ather th a n m u rd e r.” P a g e ’s a rg u m e n ts la c k m e ri t. ¶24. “I n orde rfora hom i ci de t o be j us t i f i ed as sel f

- def ens e, t he act or ’ s appr ehens i on of dangerm us tappearobj ect i vel y re al t o a re as onabl e per s on of a ver age prudence
. ” Jones v. S ta te , 39 So. 3d 860, 865 ( M i s s . 2010) ( ci t i ng H a rt v . S ta te , 63 7 S o. 2d 13 29 , 13 39 (M i ss. 1994) )
. Fur ther , “the i s s ue of j us t i f i abl e s el f
- def ens e pr es ent s a que s t i on of the w ei ghtand
c re d ib ility o f t h e e v id e n c e , ra th e r t h a n s u ff ic ie n c y , a n d is to b e d e te rm in e d b y th e ju ry .” Jones , 39 So. 3d at865 ( quot i ng W a de v. S ta te , 748 So. 2d 771, 775 (M i s s . 1999) )
. I n t he al t ernat i ve, f

ora ki l l i ng t o be cons i der ed mansl aught er , i tm us tbe “w i thoutm al i ce, i n t he heato f pass i on, buti n a cruel orunus ual m anner , orby the us e of a dange r ous w eapon,
w ith o u t a u th o ri ty o f l a w , a n d n o t in n e c e s s a ry s e lf -d e fe n s e .” M i s s . C ode A nn. § 97- 3- 35 (R e v . 2 0 0 6 ).

### 10

¶25. T he St at e s oughtt o pr ove thatPage ha d murde r ed Spi l l m an, and i tpr oduced evi dence t o sup po rti t s cl ai m . In addit i on t o the evi den ce previousl y d i scussed, the S t at e al so p rese n ted th e testi m o n y o f B y rd, an inv esti g ator fo r th e B u rea u o f F o ren sic S erv ices. B y rd t e s t i f i e d th a tS p i l l ma n wa s u n a r me d a n d th a tth e r e h a d b e e n n o we a p o n s i n h i s v e h i c l e . He f ur thert es t i f

i ed thatSpi l l m an w as hol di ng a l i ght eri n hi s r i ghthand. T he St at e’ s evi dence pr oved that , atthe t i m e of the ki l l i ng, ther e w as no phys i cal al t er cat i on bet w een the tw o and th a t S p illm a n ’s w in d o w w a s u p . ¶26. Page t es t i f

i ed that he and Spi l l m an had a hi s t ory of f r i ct i on and that he s aw Spi l l m an
r eac hi ng f

orsomet hi ng m et al l i c as he w as appr oachi ng t he vehi cl e on t he ni ghtof the ki l l i ng. Fear i ng f orhi s l i f e, Page then s hotSpi l l m an. ¶27. T he j ury m ember s w er e gi ven i ns truct i ons on s el f
- def ens e and mans l aught er . D ur i ng del i ber at i ons , the j ury w ei ghed the evi dence pr es ent ed and f ound thatthe St at e had pr oven th e e l e me n t s o f

mu r d e r . Du e t o th e p h y s i c a l e v i d e n c e a n d t h e t e s t i mo n y o f th e wi tn e s s e s , we f i nd thatthe ver di ctw as notagai ns tthe overw hel m i ng w ei ghtof the evi dence
. I V . W het her t he W eat hers by rul e appl i es . ¶28. U nder the W

eat hers by rul e,
w h e re th e d e fe n d a n t o r th e d e fe n d a n t’s w itn e ss e s a re th e o n ly e y e w itn e ss e s to the h om i ci de, theirversi on , i f r easona ble, m ust b e accep t ed as t rue, un l ess s ub st anti al l y contr adi ct ed i n m at er i al part i cul ar s by a cr edi bl e w i tnes s or w i tnes s es f

orthe s t at e, orb y t he ph ys i cal f act s orby the f

act s of comm on know l edge. Mc Q u a rte rs v. S ta te , 45 So. 3d 643, 650 ( M i s s . 2010) ( ci t i ng W e a th e rs b y v. S ta te , 16 5 M i ss. 2 0 7 , 2 0 9 , 1 4 7 S o . 4 8 1 , 4 8 2 (1 9 3 3 ). In situ a tio n s w h e re c o n flictin g e y e w itn e ss tes tim o n y is

### 11

present ed o r physi cal evidence i s present ed in opp osi t i on t o the defendan t ’s cl ai m , “t he case th e n b e c o m e s a n iss u e fo r th e jur y . T h e ju ry is to d e ter m in e if th e d e fe n d a n t’s te stim o n y is the more cr edi bl e ver s i on of event s and t o deci de ei thert o convi ctort o acquit
. ” Jones v. S ta te , 39 So. 3d 860, 864 ( M i s s . 2010) ( ci t i ng J o h n so n v . S ta te , 98 7 S o. 2d 42 0, 42 5 (M i ss. 2 0 0 8 ))
. ¶29. I n Co llin s v . S ta te , thi s C our t hel d that “i f an appel l ant r ai s es f or r evi ew an i s s ue not
r ai s ed i n the pl eadi ngs , tr ans cr i pt , orrul i ngs , t he appe l l antm us thave pr es erved the i s s ue by
r ai s i ng i ti n a mot i on f

ornew tr i al
. ” Co llin s v . S ta te , 594 So. 2d 29, 36 ( M i s s . 1992) ( ci t i ng J a c kso n v. S ta te , 42 3 S o . 2d 12 9 , 13 1 (M iss. 19 8 2 )). T h e rati o n ale b eh ind th is ru le is to al l ow the tr i al j udge the opportuni ty t o cons i derthe al l eged e rr orbef or e the i s s ue i s on
a p p e lla te re v ie w . Collins , 594 So. 2d at29 ( ci t i ng Cooperv. L aw s on , 264 So. 2d 890, 891 ( M i s s . 1972) )
. T he r ecor d r ef l ect s thatPage di d notbr i ng up the W e at hers by ru le as a defense attri al or i n h i s m oti on forj ud gm ent not w i thst and i ng the ve rdi ct . F or these reasons, P a g e is p ro c e d u ra lly b a rr e d fr o m ra is in g th is is s u e o n a p p e a l. CO NC LU SI ON ¶ 3 0
. T he evi dence pr es ent ed t o t he j ury w as s uf f i ci entt o s uppor ta ver di ctof m ur der
. T he
overw hel m i ng w ei ghtof the evi dence al s o s uppor t s the ver di ct . T her ef or e, w e af

f i rm t he ju d g m e n t a n d s e n te n c e o f t h e C ir c u it C o u rt o f F o rr e s t C o u n ty . ¶ 3 1
. CONVI CT I ON OF M URDE R AND S EN TE NCE OF LI F E I M P RI S ONM EN T I N TH E C USTO DY O F TH E M I SS I SS I PPI DE PAR TM EN T O F CO RR EC TI O N S, AF F I RM ED . W AL LE R, C. J . , CA RL S ON AN D DI CKI NS ON, P . J J . , RANDOL P H, LA M AR, KI TC HENS , CHANDL ER AND KI NG. , J J . , CONCUR.