Opinion ID: 1878419
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: whether the prejudicial effect of the introduction of allegedly gruesome photographs outweighed their probative value and constitutes reversible error by the trial court.

Text: ¶ 7. Jackson contends that gruesome photographs of the victim were erroneously admitted as their prejudicial effect outweighed their probative value. The record reflects that three photographs of the victim were admitted at trial. S-3 depicts the portion of the victim's body that could be seen from in front of the store counter, as the body was found at the scene. S-7(a) depicts the clothed body of the victim with a closer view of the wounds, as the body arrived for autopsy. S-7(b) depicts a close-up of the wounds on the victim's unclothed body at autopsy. ¶ 8. Jackson argues that the testimony of Dr. Steven Hayne was sufficient to describe the victim's wounds and the cause of death. He contends that the photographs were gruesome and inflammatory and served only to prejudice Jackson's defense. Jackson asserts that the prejudicial effect of the photographs outweighed their probative value. ¶ 9. The admissibility of photographs generally lies within the sound discretion of the trial court; and, absent an abuse of discretion, the court's decision will be upheld on appeal. Taylor v. State, 672 So.2d 1246, 1270 (Miss.1996). As to probative value versus prejudice, this Court held in Foster v. State, 508 So.2d 1111, 1117-18 (Miss.1987), that because of the discretion vested in the trial court, the task of an appellate court reviewing a M.R.E. 403 ruling is not to re-engage in the Rule 403 balancing process. Rather, the task is simply to determine whether the trial court abused its discretion in weighing the factors and admitting or excluding the evidence. Id. ¶ 10. In support of his argument, Jackson cites the only case in which this Court has reversed based on the admission of gruesome photographs. See McNeal v. State, 551 So.2d 151 (Miss.1989). The photographs at issue in McNeal depicted a full-color, close-up view of the [victim's] decomposed, maggot-infested skull. Id. at 159. This Court found the admission of these photographs violative of M.R.E. 403. The photographs in the case sub judice, though unpleasant, are not nearly so gruesome. Id. ¶ 11. Further, the photographs have considerable probative value. Photograph S-3 shows the close proximity of the victim to the window where the shot originated and also reveals the victim's relation to the cigarettes he was selling and to the cash register at the time of his death. S-7(a) and S-7(b) demonstrate the location and nature of the victim's wounds. In Edwards v. State, 737 So.2d 275, 304 (Miss. 1999), this Court upheld the admission of similar photographs since they accurately depict[ed] the wounds inflicted upon the victims and the location and posture of the bodies at the scene of the crime. ¶ 12. The probative value of the photographs in the case sub judice far outweighed any prejudicial effect. Thus, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the photographs. We find Jackson's argument to be without merit.