Opinion ID: 1109226
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 24

Heading: whether the verdict of guilty is supported by sufficient credible evidence

Text: ¶ 82. Tanner asserts that there is uncontroverted evidence that Tanner was in a jewelry store at the same time Wood's neighbor saw her followed by a man into her house. Furthermore, Tanner argues that this uncontroverted evidence precludes a verdict of guilty. The State, in return, asserts the record supports the charge of capital murder. ¶ 83. The standard of review for the legal sufficiency of evidence is well settled: [W]e must, with respect to each element of the offense, consider all of the evidencenot just the evidence which supports the case for the prosecutionin the light most favorable to the verdict. The credible evidence which is consistent with the guilt must be accepted as true. The prosecution must be given the benefit of all favorable inferences that may reasonably be drawn from the evidence. Matters regarding the weight and credibility to be accorded the evidence are to be resolved by the jury. We may reverse only where, with respect to one or more of the elements of the offense charged, the evidence so considered is such that reasonable and fair-minded jurors could only find the accused not guilty. Gleeton v. State, 716 So.2d 1083, 1087 (Miss.1998). Furthermore, factual disputes are properly resolved by a jury and do not mandate a new trial. McNeal v. State, 617 So.2d 999, 1009 (Miss.1993). [When] there is substantial evidence consistent with the verdict, evidence which is of such weight and quality that, keeping the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt in mind, fair-minded [jurors] in the exercise of impartial judgment might reach different conclusions, the jury's verdict should be allowed to stand. Ashford v. State, 583 So.2d 1279, 1281 (Miss.1991). ¶ 84. In the present case, sufficient evidence was presented to the jury to support a conviction of guilty. On March 5, 1997, the day Wood was killed, Tanner lost approximately $3,000 at a casino. Phone records indicate Tanner was in his house at 3:35 p.m. that same day. Further testimony at trial also placed Wood returning home sometime shortly after 3:30 p.m. Shaddix testified that Tanner told him he followed Wood into her house, killed her, and took her rings. Wood's neighbor also testified she saw someone follow Wood into her house that day between 4:20 and 4:35 p.m. Tanner, however, contends that he has an alibi and presented witnesses who testified he was in a jewelry store in Pearl, Mississippi, from approximately 3:55 to 4:40 p.m. Police later discovered that Tanner had taken and sold Wood's rings to a pawn shop. Tanner subsequently confessed to taking the rings two or three weeks earlier but maintained he did not kill Wood. Testimony by Wood's housekeeper, however, indicates that she helped Wood recover one of the rings Tanner pawned from a recliner on the morning of Wood's death. ¶ 85. Taking all factors into consideration, a reasonable juror could have concluded that Tanner was indeed guilty. It is enough to say that the jury, and not the reviewing court, judges the credibility of the witnesses as well as the weight and worth of their conflicting testimony. Gathright v. State, 380 So.2d 1276, 1278 (Miss.1980). Accordingly, sufficient credible evidence was presented to the jury, and Tanner's argument is without merit.