James Earl Jones is in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections and is currently housed at the Central Mississippi Correctional Facility in Pearl, Mississippi. Jones was convicted of burglary of a dwelling in the Circuit Court of Lafayette County, Mississippi, and sentenced on July 7, 2006, to serve a term of life in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections. On May 29, 2007, the Mississippi Court of Appeals affirmed Jones' judgment of conviction and sentence. Jones v. State, 995 So. 2d 146 (Miss. Ct. App. 2008) (Cause No. 2007-KA-00928-COA). On April 15, 2010, Jones signed an "Application for Leave to File Motion for Post Conviction Collateral Relief" with an attached "Motion for Post-Conviction Collateral Relief."

"The inference of participation in the crime is strongest when a defendant fails to make a credible explanation or makes a clearly false explanation." Jones v. State , 995 So. 2d 146, 151 (Miss. Ct. App. 2008) (citing Brooks v. State , 695 So. 2d 593, 595 (Miss. 1997) ).

Since then, the consideration has been limited to burglary cases concerning the unexplained possession of items. E.g., Jones v. State, 995 So. 2d 146, 150 (¶¶9-11) (Miss. Ct. App. 2008). In Hobson, however, this Court extended the consideration to a case involving the possession of a stolen firearm in violation of Mississippi Code Annotated section 97-37-35.

¶ 32. Lastly, Tutwiler claims the trial court erroneously denied his oral motion for a continuance during the trial when he felt his attorney had failed to prepare for trial. “The decision to grant or deny a motion for a continuance is within the sound discretion of the trial court and will not be reversed unless the decision results in manifest injustice.” Jones v. State, 995 So.2d 146, 152 (¶ 17) (Miss.Ct.App.2008) (quoting Ross v. State, 954 So.2d 968, 1007 (¶ 91) (Miss.2007) ). “To satisfy the burden of showing manifest injustice, the defendant must ‘show concrete facts that demonstrate the particular prejudice to the defense.’ ”

We have said that the “[l]ack of direct evidence is not fatal to the validity of a conviction.” Jones v. State, 995 So.2d 146, 150 (¶ 11) (Miss.Ct.App.2008). ¶ 20.

We have said that the "[l]ack of direct evidence is not fatal to the validity of a conviction." Jones v. State, 995 So. 2d 146, 150 (¶11) (Miss. Ct. App. 2008). ¶20.