BRISCESON AUGUSTA HASKINS A/K/A BRICESON AUGUSTUS HASKINS A/K/A BRISCESON HASKINS, APPELLANT
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, APPELLEE
COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: HARRISON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 09/26/2013. TRIAL JUDGE: HON. JOHN C. GARGIULO. TRIAL COURT DISPOSITION: CONVICTED OF BURGLARY AND SENTENCED AS A HABITUAL OFFENDER TO SEVEN YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS WITHOUT ELIGIBILITY FOR PAROLE OR PROBATION, WITH THE SENTENCE TO RUN CONSECUTIVELY TO THE SENTENCE CURRENTLY BEING SERVED.
FOR APPELLANT: OFFICE OF STATE PUBLIC DEFENDER, BY: GEORGE T. HOLMES.
FOR APPELLEE: OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, BY: LISA L. BLOUNT.
BEFORE IRVING, P.J., ISHEE AND CARLTON, JJ. LEE, C.J., IRVING AND GRIFFIS, P.JJ., BARNES, ISHEE, ROBERTS, MAXWELL, FAIR AND JAMES, JJ., CONCUR.
NATURE OF THE CASE: CRIMINAL - FELONY
¶1. A Harrison County jury found Brisceson Haskins guilty of burglary of a business. Haskins now appeals his conviction and raises the following issues: (1) whether he was entitled to a new court-appointed attorney; (2) whether he was entitled to a different trial judge; and (3) whether the State's attorney " intimidated" him and made him " scared to testify." Finding no error, we affirm.
¶2. A grand jury indicted Haskins for burglary of a business. After hearing the testimony presented at Haskins's trial, a jury found him guilty. The circuit court judge sentenced Haskins to seven years, as a habitual offender, in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections, without the possibility of parole or probation. The circuit court judge further ordered that Haskins's sentence for burglary run consecutively to another sentence currently being served by Haskins.
¶3. Following his burglary conviction, Haskins filed a motion for a new trial or,
in the alternative, a judgment notwithstanding the verdict. In addition, Haskins filed a motion for reconsideration of his sentence. The circuit court judge denied both motions. Aggrieved, Haskins appeals to this Court.
¶4. After reviewing the matter, Haskins's appellate attorney filed a brief pursuant to Lindsey v. State, 939 So.2d 743, 748 (¶ 18) (Miss. 2005), stating that he could find no arguable issues to support an appeal. Haskins was given additional time to file a pro se brief, and he now raises the following issues for this Court's consideration: (1) whether he was entitled to a new court-appointed attorney; (2) whether he was entitled to a different trial ...