Harris v. State
2011 Miss. App. LEXIS 598
Miss. Ct. App.2011Background
- Harris was convicted of aggravated assault and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon in 2010.
- Circuit court sentenced him to 20 years for aggravated assault, plus 10-year firearm enhancement under 97-37-37(2), and 10 years for felon-in-possession, with all sentences consecutive and no parole.
- The firearm enhancement was applied alongside Harris’s habitual-offender status.
- Harris challenged (1) legality of the sentence, (2) limits on cross-examination of a doctor, and (3) admission of prior-conviction details despite a stipulation.
- The State introduced Harris’s police statement admitting to prior felonies; Harris’s attorney initially objected but later allowed the tape with the prior-conviction portion.
- The court gave a limiting instruction; the appellate court held the issues were meritless and affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Illegal sentence under 97-37-37(2) | Harris argues greater minimum sentence exists via habitual offender | Harris’s sentence valid; section 97-37-37(2) applies alongside habitual offender | Sentence enhancements valid; no plain-error merit |
| Expert testimony about drug effects | Dr. Merrell should testify on common side effects | Court did not abuse discretion in limiting testimony | Limitation harmless; no reversal |
| Admission of prior convictions evidence | Statement mentioning prior convictions is prejudicial | Stipulation allowed use for element proof; no error | Procedural bar but even if reviewed, admission not reversible |
Key Cases Cited
- Abbott v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 18 (U.S. 2010) (‘except’ clause limited to greater minimums tied to §924(c)-type offenses)
- Mayers v. State, 42 So.3d 33 (Miss. Ct. App. 2010) (sentencing under 97-37-37(2) considered; timing after effective date control)
- Sistrunk v. State, 48 So.3d 557 (Miss. Ct. App. 2010) (procedural bar when objections to admission not preserved)
- Parker v. State, 30 So.3d 1222 (Miss. 2010) (plain-error review standard for unpreserved illegal-sentence claims)
- Sneed v. State, 722 So.2d 1255 (Miss. 1998) (illegality of sentence as a fundamental right)