Veazy v. State
2013 Miss. LEXIS 72
| Miss. | 2013Background
- Veazy and Mosley were convicted of armed robbery for taking Smith's Mustang from Jimmy's Repair Shop by force.
- Smith possessed the vehicle under a mechanic's lien; Veazy owned title but not possession.
- Dispute centered on authorization of repairs and whether Smith had right to possess the car.
- Smith testified he in fact retrieved keys, started the car, and fired warning shots to protect a worker.
- Defendants argued the indictment failed to allege property of another and challenged jury instructions on intent.
- Circuit Court denied JNOV and the Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed, resolving liens and possession under applicable law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Indictment sufficiency and property element | Veazy/Mosley claim no valid ‘property of another’ exists. | Smith's lien gives possessory interest; taking property tied to liened property. | Indictment sufficient; armed robbery applies to liened property. |
| Ownership vs possession for armed robbery | Defendants argue taking own property; no personal property of another. | Smith had possession rights via mechanic’s lien, justifying robbery charge. | Robbery applies when property is possessed by victim, even if title is not with victim. |
| Hearsay evidence admission | Allow statements by Smith to be admitted as hearsay. | Hearsay should be admitted under exceptions or completeness doctrine. | No reversible error; statements inadmissible hearsay with no exception shown. |
| Jury instruction on felonious intent | Needs definition of felonious intent in line with Spratt/Thomas. | Requested D-7 language was improper; D-8 correctly defined lien rights and intent. | Instruction correctly framed; D-8 proper replaces flawed D-7; no error. |
Key Cases Cited
- Herron v. State, 176 Miss. 795 (Miss. 1936) (debts not collectable by force; possession vital)
- Williams v. State, 317 So.2d 425 (Miss. 1975) (armed self-help not good faith seizure)
- Allstate Ins. Co. v. Estes, 845 So.2d 265 (Miss. 1977) (robbery targets possession, not title)
- Passons v. State, 208 Miss. 545 (Miss. 1950) (contraband may be subject of robbery despite no title)
- Bullock v. State, 391 So.2d 601 (Miss. 1980) (indictment proper when possession shown via owner/bailee/agent)
- J.A. Broom & Son v. S.S. Dale & Sons, 109 Miss. 52 (Miss. 1915) (mechanic's lien precedence over title)
- Andrews v. Waste Control, Inc., 409 So.2d 707 (Miss. 1982) (statutory interpretation in lien contexts)