Opinion ID: 1835078
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: the verdict of the jury was contrary to the law and to the overwhelming weight of the evidence and the court erred in declining to grant a new trial.

Text: The victim and her brother testified positively as to the facts of the crime (eye witnesses). The jury heard all the evidence, observed the expressions and demeanor of the witnesses, and were properly instructed by the court. In Clark v. State, 503 So.2d 277 (Miss. 1987), this Court said: On numerous occasions we have set forth the standard to be applied in ruling on denial of a motion for a new trial. Recently, in Burt v. State, 493 So.2d 1325 (Miss. 1986), citing Pharr v. State, 465 So.2d 294, 301 (Miss. 1984), this Court held: Under our established case law, the trial judge should set aside a jury's verdict only when, in the exercise of his sound discretion he is convinced that the verdict is contrary to the substantial weight of the evidence. May v. State, 460 So.2d 778, 781 (Miss. 1984). Burt, at 1328. 503 So.2d at 280. We are of the opinion that the evidence adduced in the case presented a question for the jury to determine as to whether or not the appellant was guilty and that issue was resolved against the appellant. We are further of the opinion that the evidence supports the guilty verdict. Pharr v. State, 465 So.2d 294 (Miss. 1984); Warn v. State, 349 So.2d 1055 (Miss. 1977). There being no reversible errors in the trial below, the judgment of the lower court is affirmed. AFFIRMED. HAWKINS and DAN M. LEE, P.JJ., and PRATHER, ROBERTSON, SULLIVAN, ANDERSON, PITTMAN and BLASS, JJ., concur.