Opinion ID: 1138444
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: did the trial court err in overruling the defendant's motion for a directed verdict?

Text: When considering the motion for a directed verdict, this Court must consider the evidence introduced in the light most favorable to the State, accepting all evidence introduced by the State as true, together with all reasonable inferences therefrom. McGee v. State, 569 So.2d 1191, 1192 (Miss. 1990). Defendant's sole challenge is that the State failed to prove he was the criminal agent. We agree. The only evidence there is to consider and establish in favor of the State is the palm print. Fingerprints answer only the question of identity. There must be additional evidence presented which would establish that the person identified is also the person who unlawfully entered the building with the intent to commit some crime, once entry was gained. We conclude that the evidence presented at trial was legally insufficient to support the conviction and we find that the trial court erred in denying Deloach's motion for directed verdict. We find the issues presented on appeal to be of merit. Accordingly, we reverse and render. REVERSED AND RENDERED. SULLIVAN, BANKS and McRAE, JJ., concur. DAN M. LEE, P.J., concurs in result only. HAWKINS, C.J., dissents with separate written opinion joined by JAMES L. ROBERTS, Jr. and SMITH, JJ. PRATHER, P.J., not participating.