Opinion ID: 865287
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: whether the trial court erred in imposing

Text: A FELONY SENTENCE UPON WILSON. ¶20. “This issue presents a question of law, for which the standard of review is de novo.” DeLoach v. State, 722 So. 2d 512, 518 (Miss. 1998) (citing Rose v. State, 586 So. 2d 746, 751 (Miss. 1991); Harrison County v. City of Gulfport, 557 So. 2d 780, 784 (Miss. 1990)). 6 Contrary to today’s case, the objectionable instructions in Berry and Liggins clearly allowed the jury to find the defendants guilty if only one element of the principal offense was proven. 17 ¶21. Wilson argues that the trial court erred in sentencing her, thus entitling her to a new sentencing hearing. Wilson was indicted on May 23, 2003, for the November 4, 2002, crime of felony shoplifting pursuant to Mississippi Code Annotated section 97-23-93, which stated: A person convicted of shoplifting merchandise for which the merchant’s stated price exceeds Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($250.00) shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, punished as provided in Section 97-17-41 for the offense of grand larceny. Miss. Code Ann. § 97-23-93(7) (2002). The statute subsequently was amended by the Legislature after Wilson was indicted but prior to her trial. Miss. Code Ann. § 97-23-93, as amended, states: A person convicted of shoplifting merchandise for which the merchant’s stated price exceeds Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, punished as provided in Section 97-17-41 for the offense of grand larceny. Miss. Code Ann. § 97-23-93 (7) (Rev. 2006). This amendment effectively made the charge of shoplifting merchandise over $250 in value but not more than $500 in value to be a misdemeanor rather than a felony. Wilson argues that, according to Daniels v. State, 742 So. 2d 1140 (Miss. 1999), she should be sentenced as a misdemeanant instead of a felon. Wilson further argues that the jury made a finding only that she shoplifted merchandise with a value of more than $250 rather than the required $500 based upon Jury Instruction No. 3. ¶22. Wilson’s argument is misplaced. In Daniels, the defendant committed the crime of capital rape, which at the time of the commission of the crime, carried a mandatory punishment of death or life imprisonment. Id. at 1144. The statute was amended effective from and after July 1, 1998, and the sentencing in Daniels occurred on August 24, 1998. 18 Based on prior decisions of this Court, the trial court was under the belief that it had to sentence the defendant under the statute in effect at the time of the commission of the crime. Id. at 1144-45. In applying Mississippi Code Annotated section 99-19-33, and in an effort to clarify our prior cases, we stated: [W]hen a statute is amended to provide for a lesser penalty, and the amendment takes effect before sentencing, the trial court must sentence according to the statute as amended. Any precedent holding otherwise is in error. Id. at 1145 (emphasis added). However, section 99-19-33 and Daniels stand for the proposition that when the statutory penalty for a particular crime is legislatively reduced after the date of the commission of the crime but before the date of sentencing, the trial court must sentence the defendant under the amended statute. Such a proposition is a far cry from today’s case where we are not dealing with an amended sentencing statute, but instead an amended statute as it relates to the elements of the criminal offense. One of the elements of the amended felony shoplifting statute now requires that the stolen merchandise have a stated price which exceeds $500 in value, as opposed to $250 in value. Thus section 99-19-33 and Daniels are totally irrelevant to today’s discussion. In the case sub judice, only the elements of the crime of felony shoplifting changed and not the penalty, which has remained the same during this amendment process. Wilson was properly convicted based upon Mississippi Code Annotated section 97-23-93 as it existed on November 4, 2002, the date of the crime. This issue is without merit. 19