Opinion ID: 1589063
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Whether the Trial Court Erred in Denying Chim's Motion to Suppress his Confession.

Text: ¶ 20. Where a trial judge finds at a preliminary hearing that a confession is admissible, `the defendant/appellant has a heavy burden in attempting to reverse that decision on appeal.' Le, 913 So.2d at 932 (quoting Evans v. State, 725 So.2d 613, 634 (Miss.1997) (citations omitted)). `Such findings are treated as findings of fact made by a trial judge sitting without a jury as in any other context.' Hunt v. State, 687 So.2d 1154, 1160 (Miss. 1996) (citation omitted). In reviewing the trial court's denial of Chim's motion to suppress his confession, this Court will only reverse the trial court's determination of this issue when such determination is manifestly wrong. . . . or contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence. Glasper v. State, 914 So.2d 708, 716 (Miss. 2005) (citing Manix, 895 So.2d at 180-81 (other citations omitted)). Moreover, [w]here the evidence is contradictory, this Court `generally must affirm.' Hunt, 687 So.2d at 1160 (citing Lesley v. State, 606 So.2d 1084, 1091 (Miss.1992) (citations omitted)). ¶ 21. For reasons stated herein, we find that the trial court's denial of Chim's motion to suppress his confession was not manifestly wrong or contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence. Therefore, this assignment of error is without merit.