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.

Brooks v. State

Court of Appeals of Mississippi

October 22, 2019

JASON RON BROOKS A/K/A JASON R. BROOKS A/K/A JASON BROOKS APPELLANT
v.
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE

          DATE OF JUDGMENT: 03/08/2018

          CHOCTAW COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT HON. GEORGE M. MITCHELL JR. TRIAL JUDGE

          ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: OFFICE OF STATE PUBLIC DEFENDER BY: W. DANIEL HINCHCLIFF

          ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: LAURA TEDDER SHARP

          DISTRICT ATTORNEY: DOUG EVANS

          BEFORE J. WILSON, P.J., McDONALD AND McCARTY, JJ.

          McCARTY, J.

         ¶1. Jason Ron Brooks was convicted of aggravated driving under the influence and sentenced to serve ten years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections (MDOC). Finding no arguable issue on appeal, Brooks's appellate counsel filed a brief pursuant to Lindsey v. State, 939 So.2d 743 (Miss. 2005). Brooks was given additional time to file a supplemental brief but did not. After an independent review of the record and the briefs, we conclude that there are no reversible issues and affirm Brooks's conviction and sentence.

         FACTS

         ¶2. Jason Ron Brooks was driving under the influence when he struck Marion McCullock's car, causing it to roll multiple times. As a result, McCullock was severely injured with multiple shattered and fractured bones, lacerations, and a concussion. Her doctor testified that McCullock was "permanently altered" due to her injuries.

         ¶3. Security-camera footage captured the wreck, of which a ten-second clip was shown to the jury. At a pre-trial hearing, Brooks sought to suppress the video evidence or, in the alternative, present the video in its entirety. The motion to suppress was denied, and Brooks was granted permission to show the video in mitigation, which he declined to do.

         ¶4. There was another motion hearing on the admissibility of the intoxilyzer test. Brooks challenged the validity of the results, arguing that the administering officer did not comply with the requisite twenty-minute observation period. After hearing testimony from the officer and watching footage from his body camera, the trial court found that the intoxilyzer test was properly administered.

         ¶5. Brooks also sought to suppress any statements made while he was in custody and being questioned. At the hearing on the motion, Brooks's father testified that Brooks never received his Miranda rights.[1] However, the arresting officer testified that he had informed Brooks of his rights. After watching video footage from the officer's body camera and listening to the testimony presented, the trial court found the officer properly administered Miranda.

         ¶6. After his conviction and sentence, Brooks filed a motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict and an alternative ...


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.