IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO KA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO KA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE"

Bertram Conley
5 years ago
Views:

1 E-Filed Document May :12: KA COA Pages: 10 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI RODNEY WAYNE SMITH APPELLANT VS. NO KA STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE APPELLEE DOES NOT REQUEST ORAL ARGUMENT JIM HOOD, ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: ALICIA AINSWORTH SPECIAL ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL MISSISSIPPI BAR NO OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL POST OFFICE BOX 220 JACKSON, MS TELEPHONE: (601)

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES... ii STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES... 1 STATEMENT OF THE CASE... 1 STATEMENT OF THE FACTS... 1 SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT... 4 ARGUMENT... 5 I. The evidence is sufficient to sustain Smith s conviction for escape under Miss. Code Ann CONCLUSION CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE i

3 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Cases Ivory v. State, 999 So.2d 420 (Miss. Ct. App. 2008) Lewis v. State, 761 So.2d 922 (Miss. Ct. App. 2000) Statutes Miss. Code Ann , 3, 4 Miss. Code Ann Miss. Code Ann (e) ii

4 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES I. The evidence is sufficient to sustain Smith s conviction for escape under Miss. Code Ann STATEMENT OF THE CASE This appeal by Rodney Wayne Smith proceeds from the Circuit Court of Pearl River County, with the Honorable Dina Richelle Lumpkin presiding. On December 19, 2016, Smith was indicted on one count of escape in violation of Miss. Code Ann (CP 11). His indictment also charged him as a habitual offender under Miss. Code Ann (CP 11). Following a jury trial on July 5-6, 2017, Smith was found guilty as charged. (CP 202; TR 250). The trial court sentenced him to serve five years, day-for-day, in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections (MDOC). (CP 271, TR 259). Following trial, Smith filed his motion for J.N.O.V., or in the alternative, for new trial, which the trial court denied. (CP , ). Smith timely filed his notice of appeal from the trial court s dismissal of his motion. (CP 299). STATEMENT OF THE FACTS On May 12, 2014, Rodney Smith pleaded guilty to violating the Mississippi RICO Act, a felony. (CP ). He was sentenced on that charge in July 2014 to twenty years in the custody of MDOC, with two years to serve in the custody of the Department s Intensive Supervision Program (ISP), and eighteen years on post-release supervision. (TR ). On July 23, 2014, MDOC corrections officer Scott Davis explained the terms and conditions of the ISP program with Smith to make sure he understood. (TR 81-82). Smith signed and dated the Intensive Supervision Agreement, the ISP Resident Agreement, and an acknowledgment that he received a copy of the Intensive Supervision Procedures. (Exhibits S-1-1

5 S-3). On December 22, 2014, Smith failed to report to Officer Davis, as required by the terms and conditions of his ISP agreement. (TR 93). Later that night, Officer Davis located Smith at his girlfriend s house in Picayune via his electronic monitoring ankle bracelet. (TR 97). Smith and his girlfriend were both in the ISP program, and as such, were not supposed to be around each other, per the terms and conditions of the program. (TR 92-93). By the time Officer Davis made it to Smith s girlfriend s house, Smith had already left. (TR 97). At that time, Officer Davis noticed a device tamper on Smith s ankle bracelet, which meant the bracelet had been cut. (TR 97). Officer Davis tried to call Smith several times and he did not answer. (TR 98). He went to Smith s mother s house and he was not there, nor was he at his work. (TR 97-98). Davis notified MDOC that Smith had cut off his ankle monitor. (TR 98). Smith was eventually located on January 6, 2015, at the home of Russel Barr. (TR 98-99). The officers did not have a chance to get to the house before they saw Smith run out of the back of Barr s house. (TR ). The officers chased Smith, but they lost him once he entered the woods behind the house. (TR 102). The officers received consent to search Barr s home and found a surveillance system pointed to the road in the direction of cars approaching the house. (TR 150). U.S. Marshall s finally caught Smith a week later at his ex-wife s house in Hancock County. (TR 154). 2

6 SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT Smith was confined and in custody of the MDOC under their Intensive Supervision Program. According to statute and case law, MDOC had jurisdiction over him as an inmate and was confined in their custody to his place of residence. Therefore, when he escaped his home, he escaped their custody within the meaning of and the evidence was sufficient to support his conviction. ARGUMENT I. The evidence is sufficient to sustain Smith s conviction for escape under Miss. Code Ann Mississippi Code Annotated section provides, in part: If any person sentenced to the Mississippi Department of Corrections for any term shall escape or attempt to escape from his particular unit or camp of confinement or the boundaries of the penitentiary as a whole, or shall escape or attempt to escape from custody before confinement therein, he shall, upon conviction, be punished by imprisonment in such prison for a term not exceeding five (5) years, to commence from and after the expiration of the original term of his imprisonment as extended in consequence of such escape or attempted escape. Miss. Code Ann (Supp. 2002). Smith s indictment for escape charges that he did: feloniously escape the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections in that the Defendant, Rodney Wayne Smith, cut his ankle bracelet off after being sentenced to the [MDOC] House Arrest/ISP program on July 23, 2014, for violation of the RICO Act for the State of Mississippi, a felony, thereby escaping the boundaries of his confinement, contrary to and in violation of Section [.] (CP 11). Smith argues on appeal that requires a person charged with escape to be confined in a penitentiary. (Brief p. 5-6). He argues that he was serving his sentence under house arrest, and not confined in a penitentiary, so the evidence against him is insufficient to support a conviction for escape as contemplated by the statute. (Brief p. 7). The Intensive Supervision Program (ISP) is commonly referred to as house arrest. Ivory 3

7 v. State, 999 So.2d 420, 427 ( 19) (Miss. Ct. App. 2008). Mississippi Code Annotated (e) defines house arrest as the confinement of a person convicted or charged with a crime to his place of residence under the terms and conditions established by the department or court. ISP is an alternative custodial classification; an offender in the ISP is serving time confined as a prisoner under the jurisdiction of the MDOC in the normally-understood sense of that term. Ivory at 426 ( 15) (quoting Lewis v. State, 761 So.2d 922, 923 ( 5) (Miss. Ct. App. 2000)). In other words, an offender in the ISP is an inmate in the custody of the MDOC who is serving time on house arrest instead of being housed in a MDOC facility. Id. Given that Smith was under house arrest and, therefore, confined as a prisoner under the jurisdiction of the MDOC, the particular boundaries of the penitentiary include his place of residence under the terms and conditions established by MDOC and the court. So his escape from his place of residence was an escape under Also, given the plain meaning of unit of confinement, Smith s residence was his unit of confinement. So his escape from his home was an escape from his particular unit... of confinement under Moreover, to hold that an offender is in the custody of the MDOC while confined in his home, but not in its custody within the meaning of when he escapes that confinement would defy logic. Such a holding would cause the statutes and case law that commit a prisoner to MDOC custody and the statutes that ensure the offender remains in that custody to be incongruous. Because Smith s house arrest is considered confinement under the jurisdiction, and within the boundaries, of MDOC, he was properly convicted of escape under The evidence shows that he cut off his monitoring device and was found by agents in an unauthorized location outside of his home. Therefore, the evidence was sufficient that he escaped MDOC s custody, in 4

8 violation of the terms and conditions of his ISP agreements, and his conviction and sentence should be affirmed by this Court on appeal. 5

9 CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, the State of Mississippi respectfully requests that this Honorable Court affirm Rodney Wayne Smith s conviction and sentence. Respectfully submitted, JIM HOOD, ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: s/ Alicia Ainsworth ALICIA AINSWORTH SPECIAL ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL MISSISSIPPI BAR NO OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL POST OFFICE BOX 220 JACKSON, MS TELEPHONE: (601)

10 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this day I electronically filed the foregoing pleading or other paper with the Clerk of the Court using the MEC system which sent notification of such filing to the following: W. Daniel Hinchcliff, Esq. Office of State Public Defender Post Office Box 3510 Jackson, MS Further, I hereby certify that I have mailed by United States Postal Service the document to the following non-mec participants: Honorable Dina Richelle Lumpkin Circuit Court Judge Post Office Box 1746 Picayune, MS Honorable Hal Kittrell District Attorney 500 Courthouse Square, Ste. 3 Columbia, MS This the 1st day of May, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL Post Office Box 220 Jackson, Mississippi Telephone: (601) s/alicia Ainsworth ALICIA AINSWORTH SPECIAL ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL 7

FILED AUG Q APPELLANT RODERICK G. FORIEST NO KA-2025 APPELLEE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE

FILED AUG Q APPELLANT RODERICK G. FORIEST NO KA-2025 APPELLEE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI BRIEF FOR THE APPELLEE IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TIlE STATE OF MlS~gp" RODERICK G. FORIEST VS. FILED AUG Q 72008 OFFICE OF THE CLERK SUPREME COUR{ COURT OF APPEALS APPELLANT NO. 2007-KA-2025 STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE BRIEF