Opinion ID: 1600062
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: sufficiency of the evidence

Text: ¶ 8. Mississippi Code Annotated Section 97-3-95(1)(a) (Rev.2006) provides that (1) [a] person is guilty of sexual battery if he or she engages in sexual penetration with: (a) Another person without his or her consent .... Miss.Code Ann. § 97-3-95(1)(a) (Rev.2006) (emphasis added). As the parties stipulated that Wilkins was the source of the semen, the only disputed element is whether the sexual encounter between [M.B.] ... and Wilkins was consensual or not. ¶ 9. Wilkins made a post-trial motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV), which was denied by the circuit court. A motion for J.N.O.V. challenges the legal sufficiency of the evidence. Ivy v. State, 949 So.2d 748, 751 (Miss.2007) (citing McClain v. State, 625 So.2d 774, 778 (Miss.1993)). In Bush v. State, 895 So.2d 836 (Miss.2005), this Court set out the standard of review for legal sufficiency, stating: whether the evidence is sufficient to sustain a conviction in the face of a motion for directed verdict or for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, the critical inquiry is whether the evidence shows beyond a reasonable doubt that accused committed the act charged, and that he did so under such circumstances that every element of the offense existed; and where the evidence fails to meet this test it is insufficient to support a conviction. [ Carr v. State, 208 So.2d 886, 889 (Miss.1968)]. However, this inquiry does not require a court to[:] ask itself whether it believes that the evidence at trial established guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Instead, the relevant question is whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 315, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979) (citations omitted) (emphasis in original). Should the facts and inferences considered in a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence point in favor of the defendant on any element of the offense with sufficient force that reasonable men could not have found beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was guilty, the proper remedy is for the appellate court to reverse and render. Edwards v. State, 469 So.2d 68, 70 (Miss.1985) (citing May v. State, 460 So.2d 778, 781 (Miss.1984)) .... However, if a review of the evidence reveals that it is of such quality and weight that, having in mind the beyond a reasonable doubt burden of proof standard, reasonable fair-minded men in the exercise of impartial judgment might reach different conclusions on every element of the offense, the evidence will be deemed to have been sufficient. Edwards, 469 So.2d at 70 .... Bush, 895 So.2d at 843. ¶ 10. This Court has stated that: [o]ur case law clearly holds that the unsupported word of the victim of a sex crime is sufficient to support a guilty verdict where that testimony is not discredited or contradicted by other credible evidence, especially if the conduct of the victim is consistent with the conduct of one who has been victimized. The victim's physical and mental condition after the incident, as well as the fact that the incident was immediately reported is recognized as corroborating evidence. Ladnier v. State, 878 So.2d 926, 931 (Miss. 2004) (quoting Collier v. State, 711 So.2d 458, 462 (Miss.1998)). According to M.B., Wilkins grabbed her and threatened to snap her neck, led her into an abandoned house, and then sexually battered her. Following the incident, Palmer testified that M.B. wasn't herself and had little tears in her eyes. Soon thereafter, M.B. reported the incident to Palmer. M.B. added that when she arrived home, she threw away her clothes and took a bath because she felt dirty. At the hospital, the version of the incident which M.B. recounted to Riley was substantively identical to her testimony. For instance, according to Riley: [M.B.] said that she was walking home with a man named Mr. Wilkins, that she found out was her cousin. And that he, on the way home, kind of had walked behind her and put his arm around her neck and told her to be quiet or that he would snap her neck ... if she was loud. So, then he proceeded to take her pants off and continue with the sexual assault. Regarding the lack of consent, this Court finds no other credible evidence to discredit or contradict M.B.'s testimony. Id. While M.B. did not identify Wilkins in the courtroom, the parties stipulated that he was the source of the semen.... As such, this and any other minor inconsistencies between M.B.'s testimony and that of other witnesses were matters of credibility to be weighed and resolved by the jury. See Ladnier, 878 So.2d at 931; Collier, 711 So.2d at 462 ([o]ur case law is axiomatic on the proposition that the jury is arbiter of the credibility of testimony.). While Wilkins attacks M.B.'s credibility, her testimony was not sufficiently discredited to warrant overruling the verdict. Accordingly, any rational juror could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that all of the elements had been met by the State[,] Bush, 895 So.2d at 844, in proving sexual battery. Therefore, this Court finds that the circuit court did not err in denying Wilkins's motion for JNOV, and this issue is without merit.