Opinion ID: 1696930
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Testimony of Shaghana Simpson and Photographs of the Suburban

Text: ¶ 55. Jordan also asserts that it was error for Simpson to discuss inadmissible hearsay evidence regarding a weapon alleged to have been in the possession of the Defendant at some unspecified date in the past. Jordan also argues that the prosecution used these prior unsworn statements to bolster Simpson's testimony. Because Jordan's trial counsel failed to timely object to this testimony, the issue is procedurally barred. Smith v. State, 729 So.2d 1191, 1205-06 (Miss.1998). ¶ 56. Jordan also argues that it was error for the trial court to admit photographs depicting a tan Suburban into evidence during Simpson's testimony. He asserts that there was no authentication or self-authentication of the photographs, and that there was no qualification by the witness that she had specific knowledge from the photograph that it was the same tan suburban [sic] as that owned and/or driven by the defendant. Again, trial counsel failed to timely object to the admission of the photographs and this issue is procedurally barred. See Smith, 729 So.2d at 1205-06.