96 So. 3d 33
Miss. Ct. App.2012Background
- Smith was convicted of felony DUI after evidence showed three DUIs within five years; the latest DUI occurred July 8, 2010, with two prior offenses dated 2004 and 2006.
- Officer Triplett observed Smith at the scene of a one-vehicle accident, detected alcohol on her breath, and noted slurred speech.
- A portable breath test detected alcohol; a subsequent Intoxilyzer 8000 test showed 0.11% breath alcohol content; Smith was arrested for DUI.
- At trial, only Trooper Triplett testified; after the State rested, Smith moved for directed verdict for lack of proof of two prior DUIs; the State moved to reopen and introduced exhibits showing two prior DUI convictions.
- The jury found Smith guilty of felony DUI and the circuit court sentenced her to two years in the Mississippi Department of Corrections and a $2,000 fine; Smith appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Indictment sufficiency for felony DUI | Smith argues the indictment uses weight rather than concentration, causing notice defects | State contends the indictment tracked the statute’s phrase ‘alcohol content’ and gave fair notice | Indictment sufficient; did not misstate essential elements |
| Sufficiency of evidence for two prior DUIs within five years | Smith asserts evidence fails to show two prior offenses within five years of the current offense | State asserts dates of offenses and convictions support the felony DUI element | Evidence sufficient to sustain felony DUI conviction |
| Admissibility of pre-Miranda statements | Smith contends statements were arrest-related and should have been Miranda-warned | State argues on-scene questioning in noncustodial setting is not subject to Miranda | Admissible; questioning was noncustodial on-scene investigation |
| Right to a fair trial and reopening of the State’s case | Reopening violated impartiality and prejudiced Smith | Prosecutor’s inadvertent error; reopening allowed proper development of evidence | No reversible error; reopening did not prejudice Smith or imply partiality |
Key Cases Cited
- Gray v. State, 728 So.2d 36 (Miss. 1998) (indictment must cover essential elements; fair notice from reading indictment as a whole)
- Smallwood v. State, 584 So.2d 733 (Miss. 1991) (indictment sufficiency standard; fair notice)
- Robinson v. State, 75 So.3d 1148 (Miss. Ct. App. 2011) (statutory language sufficiency when indictment tracks statute)
- Bush v. State, 895 So.2d 836 (Miss. 2005) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence post-verdict)
- Carr v. State, 770 So.2d 1025 (Miss. Ct. App. 2000) (plain-error doctrine and fundamental rights in sufficiency challenges)
- Jones v. State, 724 So.2d 427 (Miss. Ct. App. 1998) (plain-error consideration in sufficiency challenges)
- Odom v. State, 769 So.2d 189 (Miss. Ct. App. 2000) (limitations on reviewing issues not briefed or waived)