Opinion ID: 864456
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: whether the testimony of jody newell and the

Text: ADMISSION OF VAGINAL SWABS AND SLIDES WERE PROPERLY ALLOWED. ¶80. Moody argues that Jody Newell's testimony as to the vaginal swabs and slides pertaining to Robbie Bond should not have been allowed by the trial court because Newell did not take the samples herself and she had no specific recollection of the samples taken in the case sub judice. Newell testified on direct examination that she was present when Dr. Ward conducted the autopsy of Robbie Bond and observed Dr. Ward take the vaginal swabs. She testified as to the general procedure followed by Dr. Ward and her in collecting and 47 preserving vaginal swabs as evidence, and that this procedure was followed with Bond. On cross-examination, Newell admitted that she did not recall this particular autopsy, but that the same procedure was followed in every case. ¶81. M.R.E. 602 states: A witness may not testify to a matter unless evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that he has personal knowledge of the matter. Evidence to prove personal knowledge may, but need not, consist of the testimony of the witness himself. This rule is subject to the provisions of rule 703, relating to opinion testimony by expert witnesses. ¶82. The State correctly cites Parker v. State, 606 So.2d 1132, 1136 (Miss. 1992), where we held: ‘The relevancy and admissibility of evidence are largely within the discretion of the trial court and reversal may be had only where that discretion has been abused.’ Johnston v. State, 567 So.2d 237, 238 (Miss. 1990), citing Hentz v. State, 542 So.2d 914, 917 (Miss. 1989), Monk v. State, 532 So.2d 592, 599 (Miss. 1988). Unless the trial judge's discretion is so abused as to be prejudicial to the accused, this Court will not reverse his ruling. Shearer v. State, 423 So.2d 824, 826 (Miss. 1983), citing Page v. State, 295 So.2d 279 (Miss. 1974). The discretion of the trial judge must be exercised within the boundaries of the Mississippi Rules of Evidence. Johnston, 567 So.2d at 238. The trial judge did not abuse his discretion in allowing the testimony of Newell, as she had the requisite personal knowledge of that about which she was testifying. Once the evidence was received, it was for the jury to determine what weight and credit to give the evidence based on Newell’s admission that she did not recall this particular autopsy. 48 ¶83. This issue is without merit.