¶ 27. “The admissibility of evidence is within the discretion of the trial court[.]” Porter v. State, 869 So.2d 414, 417 (¶ 18) (Miss.Ct.App.2004). Absent an abuse of discretion, the trial court's decision on whether to admit evidence or exclude it will not be disturbed on appeal.
¶ 27. “The admissibility of evidence is within the discretion of the trial court[.]” Porter v. State, 869 So.2d 414, 417 (¶ 18) (Miss.Ct.App.2004). Absent an abuse of discretion, the trial court's decision on whether to admit evidence or exclude it will not be disturbed on appeal.
¶27. "The admissibility of evidence is within the discretion of the trial court[.]" Porter v. State, 869 So. 2d 414, 417 (¶18) (Miss. Ct. App. 2004). Absent an abuse of discretion, the trial court's decision on whether to admit evidence or exclude it will not be disturbed on appeal.
¶ 19. The standard of review for discovery violations is abuse of discretion. Porter v. State, 869 So.2d 414, 419(¶ 18) (Miss.Ct.App. 2004). We will affirm unless "there is a definite and firm conviction that the court below committed a clear error of judgment in the conclusion it reached upon weighing of relevant factors."
On August 21, 2002, Lajuane Porter was convicted of aggravated assault by a jury in Marshall County, Mississippi. He was sentenced to twenty years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections. Porter filed a direct appeal and on January 6, 2004, this Court affirmed his conviction. See Porter v. State, 869 So.2d 414 (Miss.Ct.App. 2004). Porter sought relief through the supreme court by submitting an Application for Leave to File Motion for Post Conviction Collateral Relief. The court granted Porter leave to file his post-conviction relief motion on the sole issue of ineffective assistance of counsel but denied his claim of an excessive sentence, finding this issue to be without merit.
Id. If the defendant does not request a continuance, he waives the issue. Id.; see also Porter v. State, 869 So.2d 414, 420 (¶ 21) (Miss.Ct.App. 2004) (finding an alleged discovery violation was waived on appeal for failure to request a continuance). In Barnes v. State, 854 So.2d 1, 5 (¶ 13) (Miss.Ct.App. 2003) (citing Kelly v. State, 778 So.2d 149, 152 (¶¶ 12-13) (Miss.
Wade v. State, 583 So.2d 965, 967 (Miss. 1991). Absent an abuse of discretion, the circuit court's decision will not be disturbed on appeal. Porter v. State, 869 So.2d 414, 417 (¶ 8) (Miss.Ct.App. 2004) (citing McCoy v. State, 820 So.2d 25, 31 (¶ 15) (Miss.Ct.App. 2002)). ¶ 17.
"The standard of review for discovery violations is abuse of discretion." Porter v. State, 869 So.2d 414, 419 (¶ 18) (Miss.Ct.App. 2004). DISCUSSION
¶ 48. "The admissibility of evidence is within the discretion of the trial court and absent abuse of that discretion, the trial court's decision on the admissibility of evidence will not be disturbed on appeal." Porter v. State, 869 So.2d 414, 417 (¶ 8) (Miss.Ct.App. 2004) (citing McCoy v. State, 820 So.2d 25, 30 (¶ 15) (Miss.Ct.App. 2002)). "When the trial court stays within the parameters of the Mississippi Rules of Evidence, the decision to exclude or admit evidence will be afforded a high degree of deference."
Upon weighing all relevant factors in the case, unless there is clear error in judgment as to the sanctions imposed for violation of the discovery rule, this Court will affirm the imposed sanction. Id. (quoting Porter v. State, 869 So.2d 414, 419 (¶ 18) (Miss.Ct.App. 2004)). ¶ 8.