Williams v. State

6 Citing cases

  1. Stevens v. State

    1999 KA 1779 (Miss. 2002)   Cited 64 times
    Aiding-and-abetting liability established where defendant and accomplice assaulted someone and accomplice fired fatal shot

    Stevens argues that without D-18, the jurors were not informed as to the meaning of the terms presented to them in the jury instructions, specifically, the term "not guilty." ¶ 60. A similar instruction was rejected by the trial court in Williams v. State, 589 So.2d 1278, 1279 (Miss. 1991). This Court denied Williams's assignment of error on appeal, stating that the burden of proof instructions and a presumption of innocence instruction granted by the trial court adequately informed the jury of the presumption of Williams's innocence and the State's burden of proof.

  2. Jones v. State

    1999 KA 1095 (Miss. 2001)   Cited 27 times
    In Jones, the Court reasoned that the record indicated other jury instructions besides the one at issue "made it clear to the jury that the burden of proof was well beyond mere suspicion."

    This Court has also been clear in holding that the trial court is not required to instruct the jury repeatedly on a question of law. Williams v. State, 589 So.2d 1278, 1280 (Miss. 1991). ¶ 22. From the record, it is plain that the State attempted to prove this case through evidence that was entirely circumstantial.

  3. Simmons v. State

    No. 2023-KA-00130-COA (Miss. Ct. App. Aug. 6, 2024)

    ; Chase v. State, 645 So.2d 829, 851 (Miss. 1994); Williams v. State, 589 So.2d 1278, 1280 (Miss. 1991)). Further, inBerry v. State, 859 So.2d 399, 404 (¶17) (Miss. Ct. App. 2003), this Court stated that it was proper to refuse a jury instruction defining reasonable doubt because the instruction was "superfluous."

  4. Goode v. State

    374 So. 3d 592 (Miss. Ct. App. 2023)   Cited 7 times

    The Mississippi Supreme Court has repeatedly-and consistently asserted that "[r]easonable doubt defines itself." Lett v. State, 902 So. 2d 630, 638 (¶27) (Miss. Ct. App. 2005) (citing Martin v. State, 854 So. 2d 1004, 1009 (¶12) (Miss. 2003); Chase v. State, 645 So. 2d 829, 851 (Miss. 1994); Williams v. State, 589 So. 2d 1278, 1280 (Miss, 1991)). Further, in Berry v. State, 859 So. 2d 399, 404 (¶17) (Miss. Ct. App. 2003), this Court stated that it was proper to refuse a jury instruction defining reasonable doubt because the instruction was "superfluous."

  5. Lett v. State

    2003 KA 1967 (Miss. Ct. App. 2005)   Cited 11 times

    2003); Chase v. State, 645 So.2d 829, 851 (Miss. 1994); Williams v. State, 589 So.2d 1278, 1280 (Miss. 1991); Allman v. State, 571 So.2d 244, 252 (Miss. 1990); Barnes v. State, 532 So.2d 1231, 1235 (Miss.

  6. Jones v. State

    2001 KA 925 (Miss. Ct. App. 2003)   Cited 2 times

    Barnes v. State, 532 So.2d 1231, 1235 (Miss. 1988); see also Williams v. State, 589 So.2d 1278, 1280 (Miss. 1991). The trial judge properly denied the instruction.