Andrew Acie Adams v. State of Mississippi
228 So. 3d 832
| Miss. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Andrew Adams was pulled over in Gulfport while a warrant existed for his arrest; officers found a loaded magazine in the driver’s door, his wife sitting on a pistol, and a .22 rifle in the trunk.
- Adams confessed at arrest that the rifle was his, describing purchase and intent to sell; at trial he testified he previously lied to protect his wife.
- Charged with two counts of possession of a weapon by a convicted felon; the court directed an acquittal on the pistol count and the jury convicted on the rifle count.
- Adams appealed, arguing (1) his confession should have been suppressed, (2) the evidence was insufficient to prove constructive possession, (3) the verdict was against the weight of the evidence, and (4) the court erred in refusing a requested jury instruction (D-6).
- The Court of Appeals reviewed procedural bars, constructive-possession principles, and the propriety of the given instruction and affirmed the conviction and sentence (ten years as habitual offender).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Adams) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Suppression of confession | Confession was induced by officer misstatements (claim wife was a convicted felon) so it was involuntary | Issue not preserved at trial; record does not support coercion; confession found voluntary | Procedurally barred and without record support; no suppression error |
| Sufficiency of evidence (constructive possession) | Vehicle belonged to wife; Adams never had physical possession; confession only admitted ownership, not contemporaneous possession | Rifle in trunk of vehicle Adams was driving, matching loaded magazine in driver’s door, plus detailed ownership confession support constructive possession | Viewing evidence for prosecution a rational jury could find constructive possession beyond reasonable doubt; sufficiency affirmed |
| Weight of the evidence | Preponderance of evidence showed rifle belonged to wife; verdict against overwhelming weight | Jury weighed credibility; physical evidence and confession support verdict | Not an exceptional case; trial court did not abuse discretion in denying new trial |
| Jury instruction (D-6 refused; S-6 given) | D-6 more detailed; S-6 improperly allows constructive possession "through another person" | S-6 is a correct, model instruction that states elements of constructive possession and has been approved by higher courts | No error; S-6 adequately stated law and was proper |
Key Cases Cited
- Bush v. State, 895 So. 2d 836 (Miss. 2005) (standard for reviewing sufficiency and weight of the evidence)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (legal sufficiency standard for criminal convictions)
- Roberson v. State, 595 So. 2d 1310 (Miss. 1992) (explaining constructive possession as dominion and control)
- Glidden v. State, 74 So. 3d 342 (Miss. 2011) (awareness and conscious possession required for constructive possession)
- Curry v. State, 249 So. 2d 414 (Miss. 1971) (proximity alone is usually insufficient to prove constructive possession)
- Watkins v. State, 101 So. 3d 628 (Miss. 2012) (approving the constructive-possession instruction given as S-6)