Opinion ID: 1849099
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 29

Heading: whether the cumulation of error in the penalty phase and the post trial phase of this case requires a new trial.

Text: ś 141. Conley argues on appeal that the cumulation of errors in the penalty phase and the post-trial phase, if not taken as error sufficient to reverse and remand for a new trial individually, are sufficient to reverse and remand if taken as a whole. This Court has often ruled that errors in the lower court that do not require reversal standing alone may nonetheless taken cumulatively require reversal. Jenkins v. State, 607 So.2d 1171, 1183 (Miss.1992). However, where there was no reversible error in any part, so there is no reversible error to the whole. Coleman v. State, 697 So.2d 777, 787 (Miss.1997). ś 142. In the post-trial phase, the State acknowledged that Conley was entitled to a new sentencing trial based upon the ex post facto error. However, the State has since changed its opinion to accurately reflect the current law on this issue. The ex post facto argument has been fully addressed in the argument labeled Sentencing Instructions, where this Court found no reversible error. ś 143. The question under the cumulative error rule is whether the defendant has been denied his substantial right to a fair trial. Wiley v. State, 750 So.2d 1193, 1210 (Miss.1999). There never has been a perfect trial. As long as humans conduct and participate in trial of lawsuits, there will not be such a trial. This Court has said many times that a defendant is not entitled to a perfect trial, only to a fair trial. Walker v. State, 671 So.2d 581, 629-30 (Miss.1995). ś 144. Each of Conley's complaints combined cumulatively was not such as to deny him a fundamentally fair trial. This is not one of those rare cases requiring reversal on the ground that cumulative effect of all errors deprived the defendant of a fair trial. Accordingly, we find no merit to this issue.