Opinion ID: 1768711
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Did the trial court err during the testimony of the State's witnesses, Investigator William Baker and eyewitness Dennis Foster?

Text: ¶ 27. Jones argues that the trial court erred in allowing Investigator William Baker (Baker) to testify about his conclusions from interviewing eyewitnesses. He also argues that the trial court erred in allowing the prosecution to discredit Dennis Foster's (Foster) testimony regarding his pre-trial statement, asserting that this interfered with his defense since Foster testified that he felt Jones was in danger when he fired his gun at Tracy. The record reveals that defense counsel failed to raise proper objections during the testimony of both Dennis Foster and Investigator Baker. Nor were these issues raised in the motion for a JNOV or a new trial. Therefore, these arguments are waived. ¶ 28. Absent a contemporaneous objection at the trial level as to a particular issue, that issue is waived on appeal. Smith v. State, 724 So.2d 280 (Miss.1998); Whigham v. State, 611 So.2d 988, 995 (Miss.1992). Indeed, [i]t is, of course, incumbent upon counsel at trial to make a contemporary objection ..., and also in his motion for a new trial, failing in which the error is waived. Id. See also Dennis v. State, 555 So.2d 679 (Miss.1989); Dunaway v. State, 551 So.2d 162, 164 (Miss. 1989). ¶ 29. The trial court sustained an objection to allowing Baker's testimony about what the witnesses told him they saw during the shooting. No objection was raised about Baker's conclusions regarding Jones's assertion of self-defense as reflected by the witness statements taken by Baker. Likewise, there was no objection to the State's questioning of Foster regarding his inability to say in his pre-trial statement that which he said during his trial testimony. ¶ 30. The record reveals that Baker testified to asking witnesses about what they saw occur on the night of the shooting. He wrote down their individual statements, read them back to them, and allowed them to make any corrections before they signed them. Baker testified that the witnesses confirmed their statements. Baker summarized the statements at trial, stating that none of the witnesses saw anyone else armed, including Tracy Marshall: Q. Did anybody tell you any facts that were included in their statements that led you to the conclusion or the possibility of self-defense? Did anybody mention any weapon? A. No sir. Q. Did anybody mention that Alvin Jones appeared to them to be threatened in any violent sort of way? A. No sir. Q. Did anybody mention that there was an any excessive violence being committed toward Alvin? A. No, sir. There was an argument that had ensued, but that was it. Q. And these, you talked to all these witnesses within ten days of the incident itself? A. Yes, sir. (emphasis added). ¶ 31. As discussed, counsel for Jones did not object to Baker's testimony about his conclusions. Nor was this issue raised in Jones's motion for JNOV or a new trial. Therefore, the judge was not allowed an opportunity to rule; and therefore, the argument is waived on appeal. ¶ 32. The record also shows that the objection raised during the testimony of Dennis Foster was on the ground of a discovery violation. There was no objection to the State's questioning of Foster regarding his failure to mention in his pre-trial statements that he thought Jones was in any danger when he fired the shot that killed Tracy Marshall. The argument regarding Foster's testimony is likewise waived.