Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Magee v. State

Court of Appeals of Mississippi

December 12, 2017

JOSHUA DEMIEN MAGEE A/K/A JOSHUA MAGEE APPELLANT
v.
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE

          DATE OF JUDGMENT: 07/25/2016

         RANKIN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT HON. JOHN HUEY EMFINGER JUDGE

          ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: MATTHEW ALLEN BALDRIDGE

          ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: JOSEPH SCOTT HEMLEBEN

          DISTRICT ATTORNEY: MICHAEL GUEST

          BEFORE GRIFFIS, P.J., BARNES AND FAIR, JJ.

          FAIR, J.

         ¶1. Joshua Magee was convicted of two counts of sexual battery relating to his then seven-year-old cousin, Abby.[1] At the time of the offense, Magee was thirty-three years of age and living in the same household as the victim. The victim disclosed repeated acts of sexual abuse after she and Magee were caught together late at night without explanation. On appeal, Magee raises a number of evidentiary issues and challenges the weight and sufficiency of the evidence. We find that none of these contentions have merit, and we affirm.

         DISCUSSION

         1. Magee's Prior Felony Conviction

         ¶2. Magee testified in his own defense. In his first issue on appeal, he complains that the trial court erred in permitting the State to impeach him with his prior felony conviction. The court limited the impeachment to the fact that Magee was a previously convicted felon; it did not allow the State to elicit the specific offense (aggravated assault), though Magee himself volunteered from the stand that his prior criminal history was "not dealing with no sexual activities."

         ¶3. From our review of the record, this issue clearly has been waived. Magee initially moved in limine to exclude any reference to his prior convictions. The trial court granted the motion, in part, except to the extent that the prior convictions might be used for impeachment if Magee testified. A ruling on that aspect of the motion was deferred. When the issue came up, after Magee declared his intent to testify in his own defense, the trial court began to hold a Peterson[2] hearing to determine whether the impeachment would be allowed. But shortly after the hearing began, Magee's attorney interposed that he had no objection to the impeachment. After the trial court offered the limitation, the attorney accepted it and reiterated that he had no objection. "In order to preserve an issue for appeal, counsel must object. The failure to object acts as a waiver." Havard v. State, 928 So.2d 771, 791 (¶34) (Miss. 2006).

         ¶4. This issue has been waived.

         2. Ineffective Assistance of Counsel

         ¶5. Next, Magee contends that his trial attorney rendered constitutionally ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to request a ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.