Opinion ID: 1696930
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: Whether the Trial Court Erred in Denying the Defendant's Motion for a New Trial

Text: ¶ 40. Jordan asserts that the trial court erred in denying his Motion for a New Trial, claiming that the jury verdict was contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence. Jordan argues again that there was no credible proof of guilt presented by the prosecution, and no positive identification of Jordan as the shooter. He appeals to this Court to reverse his conviction or, in the alternative, order a new trial for Jordan to be tried for manslaughter and not murder. ¶ 41. In reviewing whether a jury verdict is against the overwhelming weight of the evidence, [t]his Court must accept as true the evidence which supports the verdict and will reverse only when convinced that the circuit court has abused its discretion in failing to grant a new trial. Smith v. State, 868 So.2d 1048, 1050 (Miss.Ct.App.2004) (citing Dudley v. State, 719 So.2d 180, 182 (Miss.1998)). In doing so, the State is given `the benefit of all favorable inferences that may reasonably be drawn from the evidence.' Id. (citing Griffin v. State, 607 So.2d 1197, 1201 (Miss.1992)). This Court will disturb a jury's verdict [o]nly in those cases where the verdict is so contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence that to allow it to stand would sanction an unconscionable injustice. Id. (citing Dudley, 719 So.2d at 182). ¶ 42. Simpson testified that she was present at the scene of the crime and observed the shooter wearing a white t-shirt and blue jeans. She testified that the shooter left the scene in a tan Suburban that she recognized as belonging to Jordan. Netherland testified that after the shooting, he attempted to prevent the Suburban from leaving. He gave a partial license plate number to the police that matched that of Jordan's tan Suburban. Also, Netherland and Brown positively identified Jordan as the shooter in a photographic lineup. Six witnesses identified Jordan as the shooter in court. ¶ 43. Jordan's assertion that there was no positive identification of Jordan as the shooter is patently without merit. We find that the verdict in this case is not contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence. ¶ 44. Jordan's argument that this Court should order a new trial on the charge of manslaughter is also without merit. A jury normally determines whether a defendant charged with murder is guilty of murder or manslaughter after hearing all of the evidence. Hodge v. State, 823 So.2d 1162, 1166 (Miss.2002) (Whether homicide is classified as a murder or manslaughter is ordinarily an inquiry to be made by the jury.) (citations omitted). In this case, the jury had the opportunity to hear the testimony and observe the demeanor of all the witnesses. The jury was instructed to consider the crime of manslaughter if it found that the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Jordan committed depraved heart murder as defined in Mississippi Code Section 97-3-19(1)(b). [1] Miss. Code Ann. § 97-3-19(1)(b) (Rev.2006). The jury found Jordan guilty of depraved heart murder and not manslaughter. This Court will not disturb the jury verdict.