192 So. 3d 1133
Miss. Ct. App.2016Background
- Victim A.J., an elderly Greenwood resident, hired Daniel Rollings (nicknamed “Peanut”) for demolition work; Rollings later entered her home and raped her.
- A.J.’s sister found the house locked on arrival; A.J. was attacked inside after the sister left.
- A.J. identified Rollings in a photographic lineup; Rollings was arrested the next day.
- Rollings admitted sexual intercourse but claimed it was consensual and that the door was unlocked.
- DNA from Rollings matched the sexual-assault kit evidence; photos showed the house disordered consistent with a struggle.
- Jury convicted Rollings of burglary of a dwelling and forcible rape; he was sentenced to concurrent prison terms (20 and 25 years) with post-release supervision; Rollings appealed challenging evidentiary sufficiency/weight and statutory basis for the rape indictment.
Issues
| Issue | Rollings’s Argument | State’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for burglary (intent/breaking) and rape (directed verdict/JNOV/peremptory instruction) | Entry lacked criminal intent; intercourse consensual; door unlocked so no breaking | Evidence of forced entry or opening closed door, struggle inside, victim ID, DNA match — jury could infer intent to rape | Affirmed: Evidence sufficient; intent for burglary was a jury question; opening locked door sufficed for breaking |
| Weight of the evidence / new trial | Verdict against overwhelming weight; trial court erred denying new trial | Trial court considered weight; extensive corroborating evidence and no defense evidence rebutting State | Affirmed: No abuse of discretion; verdict not against overwhelming weight |
| Proper statute for indictment (97-3-65) | Statute allegedly applies only to statutory/spousal/drugging rape, not forcible rape charged | §97-3-65 covers forcible sexual intercourse; indictment proper | Affirmed: Indictment under §97-3-65 was proper |
Key Cases Cited
- Magee v. State, 966 So. 2d 173 (Miss. Ct. App. 2007) (standards for directed verdict/JNOV and intent proven by acts/circumstances)
- Bush v. State, 895 So. 2d 836 (Miss. 2005) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
- Wilson v. State, 904 So. 2d 987 (Miss. 2004) (standard for new trial based on weight of the evidence)
- Ponder v. State, 335 So. 2d 885 (Miss. 1976) (procedural bar for raising new-trial grounds on appeal)