Court Opinion

ID: 9886377
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-06 16:02:32.548902+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:49:24.740644
License: Public Domain

GRIFFIS, P.J., DISSENTING:
  

   ¶ 21. Because I would affirm the conviction under Count III, I respectfully dissent.
  

   ¶ 22. There was no direct evidence by a witness who saw the gun. However, "the absence of physical evidence does not negate a conviction where there is testimonial evidence."
   
    Sanders v. State
   
   ,
   
    162 So.3d 868
   
   , 870 (¶ 11) (Miss. Ct. App. 2015). Here, Banks testified he felt something like a gun on the back of his head. He said that he believed Brent possessed a gun because it felt hard against his skull. Banks insisted that it did not feel like a finger. "[O]ne can possess a firearm without using or displaying it."
   
    Johnson v. State
   
   ,
   
    132 So.3d 616
   
   , 627 (¶ 38) (Miss. Ct. App. 2013).
  

   ¶ 23. In my opinion, even though Banks never saw Brent's gun, Banks clearly testified that he thought Brent possessed a gun because Brent pressed something hard, unlike an opposable thumb or finger, against the back of his skull and threatened him. From this testimony, a rational juror could have found the State proved the element of possession. Accordingly, I find that there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction and the trial court did not err when it denied Brent's motion for a directed verdict regarding Count III.
  

   CARLTON AND WILSON, JJ., JOIN THIS OPINION.