Pritchett v. State, 134 So. 3d 857

Pritchett appeals convictions for armed robbery, kidnapping, and auto theft; he claims the verdicts are against the weight of the evidence due to conflicting testimony and lack of physical evidence connecting him to the crimes.
Theresa Ivy was robbed at Cash King, forced into her car at gunpoint, and the defendants drove around while demanding money, taking cash, valuables, and making Ivy submit to a planned assault.
Ivy identified Pritchett in a photographic lineup; detectives corroborated her ability to identify him from earlier descriptions.
Pritchett denied involvement at trial, despite a prior confession he later claimed was forged; the jury found him guilty.
The trial court denied a motion for a new trial; Pritchett appeals challenging the weight of the evidence and the lack of physical evidence.
The appellate court affirmed, holding the weight of the evidence supported the verdict and absence of physical evidence did not require reversal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was the verdict against the weight of the evidence due to conflicting testimony?	Pritchett argues Ivy’s trial testimony conflicts with her post‑incident statement.	Ivy’s statement shows she could not recognize faces overall, conflicting with the driver identification.	No; the testimony, viewed in the verdict’s favor, supports guilt.
Does lack of physical evidence defeat the conviction?	Pritchett asserts absence of fingerprints or other physical links undermines the verdict.	Testimonial evidence suffices to sustain the verdict even without physical evidence.	No; overwhelming testimonial evidence supports the conviction.

Bush v. State, 895 So.2d 836 (Miss. 2005) (weight-of-the-evidence standard for new trial review)
Graham v. State, 812 So.2d 1150 (Miss. Ct. App. 2002) (absence of physical evidence does not negate a conviction)
McQueen v. State, 423 So.2d 800 (Miss. 1982) (reversal not automatic when verdict conflicts with testimony)