Before Prather, C.j., Roberts And Mills, JJ.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Roberts, Justice
96-KA-01019-SCT, __ So. 2d __
JEROME WALL, a/k/a JEROME M. WALL, a/k/a JEROME MAURICE WALL, a/k/a "COWB0Y" v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 09/12/96
TRIAL JUDGE: HON. ANDREW CLEVELAND BAKER
COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: PANOLA COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
NATURE OF THE CASE: CRIMINAL - FELONY
DISPOSITION AFFIRMED - 8/6/98
MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED:
¶1. Jerome Wall was indicted by the Grand Jury of the First Judicial District of Panola County, Mississippi, for possession of a controlled substance, diazepam, as an habitual offender pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. § 99-19-83. He was also indicted on a second count for possession of a controlled substance, marijuana, less than a kilogram but more than an ounce as an habitual offender pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. § 99-19-83. Wall had been convicted two previous times in Shelby County, Tennessee, once for aggravated robbery and a second time for robbery.
¶2. After the Conclusion of all evidence and after both parties rested, the jury deliberated and returned a verdict of not guilty with respect to Count One of the indictment and guilty with respect to Count Two of the indictment. A sentencing proceeding was held wherein the State presented evidence and the trial court, Judge Andrew C. Baker, presiding, found Wall to be an habitual offender within the meaning of Miss. Code Ann. § 99-19-83. Wall was sentenced to life in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections without hope of reduction, parole or early release.
¶3. Aggrieved by the judgment rendered against him, Palm has perfected an appeal to this Court raising the following issues:
I. WHETHER THE VERDICT OF THE JURY AS TO COUNT TWO OF THE INDICTMENT IS AGAINST THE OVERWHELMING WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE?
II. WHETHER THE TRIAL JUDGE ERRED IN DENYING JURY INSTRUCTION D-2 AND IN GRANTING INSTRUCTIONS S-3 AND S-4?
III. WHETHER THE TRIAL JUDGE ERRED IN OVERRULING WALL'S MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF A CONSTITUTIONAL SPEEDY TRIAL?
IV. WHETHER THE TRIAL JUDGE ERRED IN OVERRULING WALL'S MOTION FOR A DIRECTED VERDICT OF ACQUITTAL?
V. WHETHER THE TRIAL JUDGE'S SENTENCE OF LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE VIOLATES THE EIGHTH AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION AND ARTICLE 3 SECTION ...