131 So. 3d 569
Miss.2014Background
- Stewart was convicted of armed robbery with a gun enhancement and felon in possession of a firearm following a July 2010 robbery at Fred’s store in Jackson, Mississippi.
- Police recovered a pink multicolored hat, $1,494 in cash, a revolver, and store receipts near Stewart after his arrest.
- Nelson and Crumpton identified Stewart in photo lineups and at trial; tattoos on Stewart’s face were a contested feature in the identifications.
- Stewart moved to suppress the pretrial photo lineups and in-court identifications; the trial court denied the motion.
- Stewart was sentenced on October 22, 2012 to a total of 30 years: 20 years for armed robbery, 5-year gun enhancement, and 10 years for felon in possession (5 years suspended).
- Stewart raised a double-jeopardy challenge to the five-year firearm enhancement sentence, arguing it violated the same-elements test with the armed-robbery and felon-in-possession offenses.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether photo lineups were impermissibly suggestive due to tattoos | Stewart argues tattoos singled him out in lineups. | State contends tattoos were minor differences not impermissibly suggestive. | Lineups not impermissibly suggestive; tattoos not idiosyncratic enough to taint identifications. |
| Whether firearm-enhancement sentence violates double jeopardy | Stewart claims five-year enhancement duplicates punishment for same act. | State treats §97-37-37 as a sentence enhancement, not a separate offense. | No double-jeopardy violation; enhancement is a sentence enhancement, not a separate element. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gray v. State, 728 So.2d 36 (Miss. 1998) (standard for reviewing pretrial identification suppression findings)
- York v. State, 413 So.2d 1372 (Miss. 1982) (reliability test for identification from totality of circumstances)
- Butler v. State, 102 So.3d 260 (Miss. 2012) (five-factor reliability framework for out-of-court identifications)
- Mayers v. State, 42 So.3d 33 (Miss. Ct. App. 2010) (enhanced sentence for firearm use not a separate element; Apprendi consideration)
- Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000) (penalty-increasing facts beyond maximum must be proven to a jury)
- White v. State, 702 So.2d 107 (Miss. 1997) (facts like distinctive appearance can be offset by other reliable identification)
- Foster v. State, 493 So.2d 1304 (Miss. 1986) (lineup characteristics not automatically excluding reliability when accuracy remains)
- Jones v. State, 504 So.2d 1196 (Miss. 1987) (hat or distinctive feature did not render lineup impermissibly suggestive)