Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
D was indicted for disturbing the peace, by indecent proposals to and offensive contact with an 18-year-old hitchhiker to whom he is said to have given a ride in his car. The jury was charged that it could not find D guilty on the unsupported and uncorroborated testimony of the complainant alone. he hitchhiker's testimony was accurate in its detail with evidence that could have been seen only by one inside the car. The right-hand ashtray of the car was full of Dentyne chewing gum wrappers, and the cigarette lighter did not function. A police officer testified that after D's arrest, he had returned to D's home and obtained the permission of D's wife to look in the car. The wife provided the officer with the keys, with which the officer opened the car. The officer testified that he tried the lighter and it would not work, and also that the ashtray 'was filled with red Dentyne chewing gum wrappers.' D did not object to the officer’s testimony. D did move for a directed verdict on constitutional grounds of a search but the motion was denied. D was found guilty. On appeal, the Mississippi Supreme Court first filed an opinion that reversed D's conviction and remanded for a new trial. The court held that the wife's consent to the search of the car did not waive D's constitutional rights. Acting in the belief that D had been represented by nonresident counsel unfamiliar with the local procedures, the court reversed despite D's failure to comply with the Mississippi requirement that an objection to illegal evidence be made at the time it is introduced. The State (P) filed a Suggestion of Error, pointing out that D was in fact represented at his trial by competent local counsel, as well as by out-of-state lawyers. The Mississippi Supreme Court withdrew its first opinion and filed a new opinion affirming D's conviction. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co