Title: Gentry v. State
Citation: 416 So. 2d 650
Docket Number: 53112
State: Mississippi
Issuer: Mississippi Supreme Court
Date: May 26, 1982

416 So. 2d 650 (1982) Arthur Lee GENTRY v. STATE of Mississippi. No. 53112. Supreme Court of Mississippi. May 26, 1982. Rehearing Denied July 28, 1982. Chatwin M. Jackson, Jr., Kosciusko, for appellant. Bill Allain, Atty. Gen. by Wayne Snuggs, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee. *651 Before WALKER, BOWLING and HAWKINS, JJ. WALKER, Justice, for the court: This is an appeal from the Circuit Court of Montgomery County, Mississippi, wherein the jury convicted appellant, Arthur Lee Gentry, for the capital murder of Jerry Grice and sentenced him to a term of life in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections. Appellant first assigns as error his arraignment during vacation over his objection. He contends his conviction and sentence should be set aside so that he might be properly arraigned during a court term and retried. Assuming, arguendo, arraignment was improperly held during vacation, the appellant has not demonstrated wherein he was prejudiced in any manner by being arraigned in vacation on a day designated by the court for arraignments and motions. Appellant next contends the trial court erred in refusing to grant his motion for a change of venue. The appellant's motion was not supported by affidavits of two or more credible persons as required by Mississippi Code Annotated section 99-15-35 (1972). We have held this requirement is essential to the validity of the motion. Wilson v. State, 234 So. 2d 303 (Miss. 1970); Thompson v. State, 231 Miss. 624, 97 So. 2d 227 (1957); Purvis v. State, 71 Miss. 706, 14 So. 268 (1893). An affidavit was filed by appellant's attorney to the effect that he was unable, after diligent search and inquiry, to locate two reliable citizens of the county who would be willing to sign an affidavit that, in their opinion, the appellant could not receive a fair trial due to excessive and improper publicity in the press, on the radio and word of mouth and gossip. The attorney further alleged: The trial court held a hearing on appellant's motion on October 16, 1980. It was established there was only one newspaper[1] account of the murder in Montgomery County and the case mentioned on radio station WONA only six times at or about the time the crime was committed. WONA also reported the finding of the preliminary hearing and recently a brief mention that the case would be coming to trial. From the time of the first newscast until the case was called to trial, approximately eight months elapsed. At the hearing the State called numerous witnesses including: All of the above testified they knew of no prejudgment of the case or prejudice against appellant in the public mind and in their judgment the appellant could obtain an unbiased and fair trial in Montgomery County. Furthermore, several attorneys called by the appellant and his alleged accomplice testified that although they could not represent the appellant for various reasons, when asked, stated, in their opinion, he could receive a fair and impartial trial in Montgomery County. We have carefully considered the record and are of the opinion the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying appellant's motion for a change of venue. Appellant's final proposition is that the trial court erred in admitting into evidence his alleged confession. The appellant was indicted for capital murder on a charge of having committed the crime of murder while engaged in an armed robbery. He objected to the introduction of his confession on several grounds but urges only the following one on appeal: There is no question that the corpus delicti as to murder was fully established. See Jackson v. State, 337 So. 2d 1242 (Miss. 1976). However, the appellant argues the State could not introduce his confession until also proving the corpus delicti of robbery. This assignment is wholly without merit as the proposition is controlled by Rhone v. State, 254 So. 2d 750 (Miss. 1970). The fact that Rhone was decided under our felony murder statute, Mississippi Code Annotated section 97-3-19 (1972), which was subsequently amended as our present capital murder statute and under which appellant was tried, does not change the rule announced in Rhone. In Rhone, we held: The corpus delicti with respect to the murder was sufficiently proved and this is admitted by the appellant. Therefore, under Rhone the robbery could then be proved entirely from the confession to make out a case of capital murder. Finding no reversible error, the conviction and sentence of appellant are affirmed. AFFIRMED. PATTERSON, C.J., SMITH and SUGG, P. JJ., and BROOM, ROY NOBLE LEE, BOWLING, HAWKINS and DAN M. LEE, JJ., concur. [1] The Winona Times, a weekly publication.