Opinion ID: 1696930
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Testimony of David Whitehead

Text: ¶ 63. Jordan asserts that it was error for the trial court to allow the testimony of David Whitehead, an expert in forensic science, regarding gunshot residue and the ways in which gunshot residue can be removed. Jordan asserts that the testimony was inadmissible under Mississippi Rule of Evidence 702 in that it did not aid the trier of fact in understanding the evidence. Miss. R. Evid. 702. Jordan asserts, [t]his `no evidence of residue' witness was staged to imply that the Defendant was guilty because he did not have gunshot residue on his person, clothing or vehicle. Jordan's appellate attorney goes on to argue that `[t]he evidence' in this case is `no evidence.' We find this assertion of error to be procedurally barred because the testimony of Mr. Whitehead was taken absent objection at trial. Walls v. State, 928 So.2d 922, 927 (Miss.Ct.App.2006).