Opinion ID: 1661111
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Whether the evidence provided by Willie Holmes supported a conviction of conspiracy to commit murder and murder?

Text: ¶ 9. Brown was convicted under Miss. Code Ann. § 97-1-1 for conspiracy to commit murder. This Court has defined conspiracy to be a combination of two or more persons to accomplish an unlawful purpose or to accomplish a lawful purpose unlawfully, the persons agreeing in order to form the conspiracy. The offense is complete without showing an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy. Peoples v. State, 501 So.2d 424, 428 (Miss.1987) (citing Norman v. State, 381 So.2d 1024 (Miss. 1980); Moore v. State, 290 So.2d 603 (Miss. 1974); Pickett v. State, 139 Miss. 529, 104 So. 358 (1925)). ¶ 10. Under § 97-1-1, two or more persons must agree to commit a crime in order for a conspiracy to exist. The agreement need not be formal or express, but may be inferred from the circumstances, particularly by declarations, acts and conduct of the alleged conspirators. Barnes v. State, 493 So.2d 313, 315 (Miss. 1986) (citing Norman v. State, 381 So.2d 1024 (Miss.1980); Griffin v. State, 480 So.2d 1124 (Miss.1985)). In Davis v. State, 485 So.2d 1055, 1058 (Miss.1986), this Court also held that the existence of a conspiracy, and a defendant's membership in it, may be proven entirely by circumstantial evidence. Similarly, there must be some evidence that a defendant has associated himself with the venture in some fashion, participated in it as something that he wished to bring about, or sought by his action to make it succeed. Id. ¶ 11. Based on the record before this Court, there was enough evidence before the jury to find Brown guilty of conspiracy to commit murder. Brown argues that there was not enough evidence to convict him based on the testimony of Willie Holmes alone. Whether that be true or not, the jury considers all of the evidence and not just the testimony of one witness. The jury was presented with the following evidence for consideration: (1) Delesia and Felicia Gordon, sisters, were sitting on the front porch of their cousin's house. Simmons walked up and spoke with the girls briefly. The girls then saw Simmons walk down the alley beside the house. They testified that they heard shooting coming from the alley. When the shooting stopped, the girls testified that Brown and Holmes came running to the front of the house. The sisters testified that both men had guns and were asking each other did you get him? (2) Willie Holmes, on the day of the shooting, August 21, 1996, made his first statement to the police. He stated that Gowdy wanted to buy a gun to shoot Bam, a/k/a Larry Simmons. Holmes also stated that Gowdy got the gun from Kenny Brown. Holmes said that Brown was the one who informed everyone that Larry Simmons (Bam) was outside. (3) In a second statement made by Willie Holmes to the police on August 23, 1996, he said that [a]ll of the sudden Little Kenny came running back up on the porch and up to Pat and hands Pat his gun and then says, Barn's in the alley. And then Pat and Little Kenny runs up inside of Pat's house. After Brown gave Gowdy the gun, the two men [Brown and Gowdy] went inside the house. Pat brought Little Kenny's [Brown] gun up and aimed it at Bam [Simmons]. Simmons started running down the alley and Holmes stated that he saw Pat and Little Kenny running to the alley. (4) In this second statement made by Holmes, he also stated that I saw Bam lying face down on the ground, blood on his back, and I saw Pat and Little Kenny standing in the alley near the car, and Pat still had the gun pointed down the alley towards where I was standing. He lowered it to his side while I watched, and then he and Little Kenny ran away towards Pat's house. (5) In a statement made by Kenny Brown to the police, Brown was asked if he knew that Gowdy was going to shoot Simmons (Bam). He answered, Yes, sir. I knew he was going to shoot him. Brown also stated that he was the one who provided the gun to Patrick Gowdy before the shooting. (6) When Willie Holmes took the stand at trial, he testified that the police added things to his second statement. He then testified that Brown did not come out of the house. ¶ 12. We have held that jurors are permitted, indeed have the duty, to resolve the conflicts in testimony they hear. They may believe or disbelieve, accept or reject the utterances of any witness ... A reviewing court cannot and need not determine with exactitude which witness or what testimony the jury believed or disbelieved in arriving at its verdict. Ducksworth v. State, 767 So.2d 296, 299-300 (Miss.App.2000) (quoting Groseclose v. State, 440 So.2d at 300). Also, in Bond v. State, 249 Miss. 352, 357, 162 So.2d 510, 512 (1964), this Court stated that [i]n a criminal prosecution, the jury may accept the testimony of some witnesses and reject that of others, and may accept in part and reject in part the testimony of any witnesses, or may believe part of the evidence on behalf of the state and part of that for the accused, and the credibility of such witnesses is not for the reviewing court, but only for the jury. Id. ¶ 13. As earlier stated, a conspiracy exists when two or more persons agree to commit a crime. Barnes, 493 So.2d at 315. The agreement need not be formal or express, but may be inferred from the circumstances, declarations, acts and conduct of the alleged conspirators. Id. (citing Norman v. State, 381 So.2d 1024 (Miss. 1980); Griffin v. State, 480 So.2d 1124 (Miss.1985)). There was enough evidence in the record to support the finding that Brown and Gowdy entered into an agreement to commit murder. For this reason, the conspiracy to commit murder conviction is upheld. ¶ 14. In the same way, the jury had enough evidence before it to convict Brown of murder under Miss.Code Ann. § 97-3-19(1). The jury was given the following instruction in regards to Count 2, murder: The Court instructs the jury that the killing of a human being without the authority of law and not in necessary self-defense, by any means or any manner is murder when done with deliberate design to effect the death of the person killed, or of any human being. The Court further instructs the jury that any person wilfully aiding, assisting or encouraging the commission of a felony is deemed and considered a principal as if he had with his own hand committed the entire offense. Therefore, if you find from the evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, that on or about August 21, 1996, in the First Judicial District of Hinds County, Mississippi, Larry Donnell Simmons, a human being, was killed by another, without authority of law and not in necessary self-defense, by any means or any manner, and with deliberate design to effect the death of said Larry Donnell Simmons, and you further finds [sic] from the evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant, Kenny Markcol Brown, wilfully aided, assisted or encouraged same, then the defendant, Kenny Markcol Brown, is guilty as charged as to Count 2 and it is your sworn duty to so find. If the State has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt any one of the above required elements of the offense of murder, then it is your sworn duty to find the defendant, Kenny Markcol Brown, not guilty as to Count 2. ¶ 15. Brown alleges that the testimony of Willie Holmes, alone, was not enough to convict him of murder. However, as earlier listed in this opinion, there was more sufficient evidence in the record other than the testimony of Willie Holmes. There is sufficient evidence in the record to satisfy a murder conviction consistent with Miss. Code Ann. § 97-3-19(1). ¶ 16. In his statement to the police on August 26, 1996, Brown admitted that he knew Gowdy was going to handle his business with Simmons. Brown also said that he knew Gowdy was going to shoot Simmons in the leg. After Gowdy told Brown that he wanted to buy a gun, Brown gave Gowdy his nine millimeter. Also, there was testimony from Delesia and Felicia Gordon that indicated Brown and Holmes, immediately following the shooting, were running and asking each other, did you get him? Additionally, there was evidence in the record that indicated Brown was the one who alerted Gowdy that Simmons was outside. ¶ 17. In Jones v. State, 710 So.2d 870, 874 (Miss.1998), this Court held that [a]ny person who is present at the commission of a criminal offense and aids, counsels, or encourages another in the commission of that offense is an `aider and abettor' and is equally guilty with the principal offender. Id. (citing Hoops v. State, 681 So.2d 521, 533-34 (Miss.1996); Sayles v. State, 552 So.2d 1383, 1389 (Miss.1989)). As earlier mentioned, jurors are permitted to believe or disbelieve any utterances of any witness. Ducksworth v. State, 767 So.2d at 299. ¶ 18. The above evidence was sufficient for the jury to determine that Kenny Brown did, in fact, aid, counsel, or encourage the commission of murder and therefore, he is equally guilty with the principal offender. Hoops, 681 So.2d at 533-34. For this reason, the murder conviction is affirmed.