Mississippi Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

It is illegal under Mississippi law to resist or obstruct an arrest. According to Mississippi Code Section 97-9-73, it is unlawful for any person to resist by force, violence, threats, or any other manner, his lawful arrest, or the arrest of another person, by any local, state or federal law enforcement officer. A conviction for resisting arrest may result in a sentence of six (6) months in the county jail and a $500.00 fine.

In order to convict a person of resisting arrest, the arrest must be lawful. If the police officer making the arrest lacked probable cause or other legal authority to arrest the defendant, then he is not guilty of resisting arrest. Furthermore, in Mississippi, a person has the right to use reasonable force to resist an unlawful arrest. Chambers v. State, 973 So.2d 266 (Miss.App. 2007). Despite the fact that citizens have the right to use force to resist an unlawful arrest, for obvious reasons, it is not recommended that this right be exercised.

The crime of resisting arrest also requires that the defendant know the officer is, in fact, a law enforcement officer. Where the defendant does not know that the person making the arrest is a law enforcement officer, this lack of knowledge may form a defense to the charge of resisting arrest in Mississippi. In cases where the arresting officer is in uniform, this probably will not be an issue. However, in cases where the officer is in street clothes or otherwise fails to identify himself as a police officer, the defendant will have a valid defense to the charge of resisting arrest.

If you have been arrested and charged with resisting arrest in Mississippi, please contact us for a free case evaluation.

Fleeing from the police, or eluding the police, while operating a motor vehicle, is a serious crime in Mississippi. Under Mississippi Code Section 97-9-72, fleeing or eluding occurs when the driver of a vehicle is given a visual or audible signal by a law enforcement officer to stop the vehicle, and then willfully fails to stop. The law enforcement officer must be in the lawful performance of his duty, and have a reasonable suspicion that the driver has committed a crime at the time he attempts to stop the vehicle.

Whether fleeing or eluding the police is a felony or a misdemeanor depends on the circumstances of the case. In general, fleeing or eluding is a misdemeanor. This crime carries a potential jail sentence of six (6) months, and a fine of up to $1,000.00.

This crime may be charged as felony eluding or felony fleeing under certain circumstances. If the defendant, in attempting to flee or elude police, operates a motor vehicle in such a manner as to indicate a reckless or willful disregard for the safety of persons or property, or manifests extreme indifference to the value of human life, the defendant may be charged with felony fleeing or felony eluding under Mississippi law.

The sentence for felony fleeing or eluding depends upon whether another person was injured as a result of the fleeing. If no person suffered any injuries, the maximum sentence is five (5) years in prison and a $5,000.00 fine. Where another person suffers serious bodily injury, the potential sentence is 3 to 20 years in prison. If the fleeing results in death, the defendant is facing a sentence of 5 to 40 years in prison.

While felony fleeing and felony eluding carry tough penalties in Mississippi, the statute does specifically outline available defenses. It is a defense to fleeing or eluding where the law enforcement officer was not in uniform, or if no law enforcement vehicle used in the stop was clearly marked as a law enforcement vehicle. The statute also states that it is a defense to this charge if the driver proceeded in a safe manner to a reasonably well-lit public place before stopping. This defense recognizes that citizens may be uneasy stopping in remote areas at night, and allows a driver to proceed to a safer area before stopping.

If you have been charged with fleeing or eluding in Mississippi, please contact us for a free case evaluation. Please also feel free to visit our Jackson, Mississippi criminal lawyer website for more information.

It is a felony crime in Mississippi to bribe a juror in exchange for voting a certain way in a case. It is also a felony for a juror to accept a bribe.

A person commits the crime of bribing a juror if he intentionally or knowingly gives, or offers to give, a juror some type of benefit with the intent to influence the juror's decision in a case. Mississippi Code Section 97-9-117. A juror who accepts, or agrees to accept, such a benefit with the understanding that his vote or decision will be influenced, is guilty of accepting a bribe. Mississippi Code Section 97-9-119.

These crimes carry maximum sentences of five (5) years in prison and a $5,000.00 fine.

Jackson-based criminal defense attorney Curt Crowley has been ranked "Superb" by lawyer rating service Avvo.

Avvo is an independent attorney rating service. Avvo's rating system is objective, and is based upon a number of factors, including an attorney's background, experience, education and reviews by other lawyers. Avvo keeps its exact rating formula secret in order to prevent lawyers from manipulating the rating system. Avvo does not accept money in exchange for ratings, and prides itself on the fact that lawyers cannot "buy" a rating.

Avvo's rating system assigns a numerical rank of 1-10 to a particular lawyer. Lawyers who are ranked 9.0 to 10.0 receive the rating of "Superb."

Curt Crowley received the ranking of "Superb" at the beginning of August. You can view Crowley's Avvo profile here.

While Mr. Crowley is honored to receive this rating, he reminds the public that they should not base their choice of lawyer solely on a rating by any organization. Choosing a lawyer is an important decision, especially in Mississippi criminal cases. Curt Crowley advises anyone who is seeking a criminal lawyer in Mississippi to research the background of the lawyer, and to not be afraid to ask the lawyer for additional information about his background, education, training and experience.

The Crowley Law Firm publishes free background information to the public. For your convenience, most of this information is contained either on this blog, or at our Jackson, Mississippi criminal defense lawyer website. Should you desire additional background information about the criminal defense lawyers at The Crowley Law Firm, please feel from to contact us using the secure form to the right of this page, or by phone at 601.944.1984.

The Mississippi legal community was recently rocked by allegations of judicial bribery in Mississippi state courts. Following an extensive investigation, several lawyers were indicted for bribing judges in an effort to secure favorable rulings in cases. Several judges were also indicted for accepting bribes in exchange for making rulings that were favorable to a particular party. Following these indictments, most of the lawyers and judges were convicted of these crimes, either by way of guilty plea or trial.

These judicial bribery investigations were handled by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and then prosecuted by federal prosecutors in federal courts. The defendants were all accused of violating federal criminal statutes dealing with judicial bribery.

While these cases were brought under federal law, Mississippi state law also makes bribing a judge a felony crime. According to Mississippi Code Section 97-9-116, a person commits the crime of bribing a judge if he knowingly or intentionally offers, gives, or agrees to give any benefit to a judge, in exchange for the judge ruling a certain way in a case.

A few key points about Mississippi's judicial bribery statute:

(a) Intent is key. The person who confers the "benefit" upon the judge must do so with the intent to influence the judge's decision. Merely giving a judge a gift or other valuable thing, without the intent to influence the judge's decision in a case, is not bribery of a judge under Mississippi law.

(b) Even offering to give the judge a benefit or thing of value violates this statute. It does not matter if the accused actually followed through and gave the gift to the judge, or if the judge accepted the gift. This crime is complete at the time the offer is made.

(c) Any "benefit" is included under this statute. The statute is not limited to cash or property.

(d) The statute applies to administrative hearings and proceedings, as well as courts-of-law. For example, an administrative law judge or hearing referee would qualify as a judge under this section.

Section 97-9-116 carries severe penalties. A person convicted of bribing a judge in Mississippi faces a sentence of five to twenty years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections and a fine in the amount of $25,000.00, or three times the amount of the bribe, whichever is greater.

For more information regarding this crime, please contact us using the form at the right of the screen. All inquiries are held in the strictest confidence.

As I've written before, juries in Mississippi are expected to reach their decisions based on the evidence properly admitted at trial and on the law as instructed by the Court. Mississippi criminal law prohibits a person from tampering with a jury or intimidating a juror.

Jury Tampering

A person is guilty of the crime of jury tampering in Mississippi if he, with the intent to influence a juror's vote, opinion, decision or other action in a case, intentionally or knowingly attempts to communicate directly or indirectly with a juror other than as part of the proceedings in the trial of the case. Mississippi Code Section 97-9-123.

The mere act of talking to a juror in an attempt to influence her decision is jury tampering under Mississippi law. Indirect communication, such as communicating with a juror's friends or family members also constitutes jury tampering, if done with the intent to influence a juror's vote or decision in a case.

Jury tampering carries a potential sentence of two (2) years in prison and a fine in the amount of $3,000.00.

Intimidating a Juror

Mississippi criminal law states that a person is guilty of intimidating a juror if he intentionally threatens a member of the jury, in order to cause the juror to vote a certain way in a case. Mississippi Code Section 97-9-121.

Intimidating a juror is treated more harshly than jury tampering. Intimidating a juror carries a maximum sentence of five (5) years incarceration, as well as a $5,000.00 fine.

These felony crimes are another of Mississippi's criminal statutes relating to the administration of justice. If you have questions regarding these or any other Mississippi criminal offenses, please contact us for additional information.

The administration of justice depends, in large part, upon witnesses taking the witness stand in a court of law, taking an oath, and truthfully answering questions. When witnesses do not do this, the entire system of justice will likely fail. For this reason, Mississippi criminal law makes witness bribery, witness intimidation and witness tampering criminal offenses.

Witness Bribery

Mississippi Code 97-9-109 states that a person commits the crime of bribing a witness if he intentionally or knowingly offers, confers or agrees to confer any benefit upon a witness or a person he believes will be called as a witness in any official proceeding, with the intent to (a) influence the testimony of that person, (b) induce that person to avoid legal process summoning him to testify, or (c) induce that person to absent himself from an official proceeding to which he has been legally summoned.

Mississippi law on witness bribery also makes it a felony crime for a witness to accept a bribe. According to Section 97-9-111, a witness or person who believes he will be called as a witness in any official proceeding, commits the crime of witness bribery if he intentionally or knowlingly solicits, accepts or agrees to accept any benefit in exchange for an agreement that (a) his testimony will be influenced, (b) he will attempt to avoid service of process commanding him to testify, or (c) he will fail to appear to testify after he has been legally summoned.

Regardless of whether the defendant is a person who is charged with bribing a witness, or a witness accused of accepting a bribe, the defendant faces a potential sentence of five (5) years in prison and a fine of $5,000.00.

Intimidating a Witness

Intimidating a witness is also a felony crime in Mississippi. Mississippi Code Section 97-9-113 states that a person commits the crime of intimidating a witness if he intentionally or knowingly attempts, by the use of a threat directed to a witness or potential witness in any official proceeding, to (a) influence the witness' testimony, (b) have the witness avoid legal process ordering him to testify, or (c) fail to attend the proceedings after he has been summoned as a witness.

This crime is similar to witness bribery, in that it prohibits improper influence of a witness. The only difference is the manner in which the witness is influenced. Rather than giving the witness money or other benefits, witness intimidation involves the use of threats to influence the witness' testimony.

Witness intimidation also carries a maximum penalty of five (5) years in prison and a fine of $5,000.00.

Witness Tampering

Witness tampering under Mississippi law appears to be similar to witness intimidation and witness bribery, but is much more broad than either of these two statutes.

The crime of witness tampering is contained in Mississippi Code Section 97-9-115. Under that section, a person commits the crime of witness tampering if he intentionally or knowingly attempts to induce a witness or person he believes to be a witness to (a) testify falsely or unlawfully withhold testimony, or (b) fail to appear in court after being lawfully summoned to appear.

Witness tampering involves conduct that is not included within the witness bribery or witness intimidation laws. Witness tampering includes any conduct on the part of a person that is designed to influence the witness' testimony. There is no requirement that the accused give a benefit or use threats to influence the witness. Virtually any conduct of any type whatsoever that is designed to influence the witness is prohibited by this statute.

Witness tampering is also different from the other statutes, in that it includes attempts to have a witness unlawfully withhold testimony at trial. This part of the statute would apply if a person influenced a witness to take the witness stand, and then refuse to testify as ordered by the Court. Of course, the witness would be held in contempt for refusing to testify. However, the person who influenced the witness to refuse to testify could be charged with witness tampering.

Surprisingly, witness tampering carries a lesser sentence than bribery and intimidation: two (2) years in prison and a fine of $3,000.00.

What you need to do if charged with witness bribery, witness intimidation or witness tampering in Mississippi.

Because our legal system depends on witnesses taking the witness stand and telling the truth, the law takes witness tampering and attempts to influence witnesses very seriously. As you can see from the potential sentences, a conviction for any of these crimes carries significant prison time.

That being said, these crimes are notoriously difficult for the State to prove. Nearly every witness bribery, witness intimidation and witness tampering case can be successfully defended. Time is often a key element in gathering the necessary facts and information to defend these cases, so it is important that you seek an experienced Mississippi criminal lawyer as soon as you think you may be under investigation for these crimes.

If you've been charged with these crimes, please contact us to discuss your case. There is no charge for an initial consultation.

Mississippi has many criminal laws that deal with conduct that interferes with the administration of justice. One of those laws is hindering prosecution in the first degree.

What is hindering prosecution in Mississippi?

A person commits the crime of hindering prosecution in Mississippi if he, with the intent to hinder the apprehension, prosecution, conviction or punishment of another for a felony crime, renders criminal assistance to such person. See Mississippi Code Section 97-9-105.

What is criminal assistance?

Under the hindering prosecution statute, a person renders criminal assistance if he (a) harbors or conceals the other person, (b) warns the other person that he is about to be discovered or apprehended, (c) provides or helps the other person obtain money, transportation, weapons, disguises or other means to avoid discovery or apprehension, (d) prevents or obstructs, through the use of force, deception or intimidation, anyone from performing an act that might aid in the discovery, apprehension or conviction of the other person, or (e) conceals, alters or destroys any physical evidence that might aid in the discovery, apprehension or conviction of the other person.

What is the penalty for hindering prosecution in Mississippi?

The penalty for hindering prosecution in Mississippi is up to five (5) years in prison, and a fine of $5,000.00.

Is there hindering prosecution in the second-degree in Mississippi?

Yes, but under a different statute (Section 97-9-107). Second-degree hindering prosecution is exactly the same as first-degree, except that the person to whom assistance is furnished must be accused of a misdemeanor, as opposed to a felony.

Hindering prosecution in the second-degree is itself a misdemeanor, and may be punished by a sentence of one (1) year in the county jail and a fine of $1,000.00.

If you have questions about this or any other Mississippi criminal law, please contact us.

Mississippi criminal courts go to great lengths to ensure that juries are not improperly influenced in their deliberations.

Under Mississippi criminal law, juries are expected to base their decision on the facts and evidence presented in court, and the law as given to them by the judge. In any given Mississippi criminal case, there are matters that are not admitted into evidence at trial. The court will typically exclude various types of improper evidence and not allow the jury to hear or see this type of evidence.

Even though the judge may keep improper evidence from the jury, there is always the risk that jurors will hear or see the excluded evidence outside of Court. For this reason, in addition to not allowing the jury to see improper evidence, the judge usually orders the jury not to discuss the case with anyone outside of Court, and to not read any news or media reports about the case. The Court will also instruct the jurors not to do any investigating on their own (such as going to the scene of the crime outside of court). These instructions are usually repeated throughout the trial in order to remind the jury of their duty to decide the case only upon the evidence presented in the courtroom.

While news reports may be the greatest source of improper evidence getting to the jury, there also exists a possibility that court personnel and bailiffs will "accidentally" talk about improper matters within earshot of the jury. Bailiffs are responsible for taking care of the jury during their service, and typically have a great deal of personal contact with the jurors. Consequently, there is a high risk that a bailiff will make an improper comment in the jury's presence. To combat this problem, judges usually give strict instructions to bailiffs and other court personnel to avoid making any statements that the jury might overhear.

In addition to the instructions from the Court, Mississippi criminal law attempts to minimize the risk that improper facts and evidence will not be disclosed to the jury by court personnel. For example, Mississippi Code Section 97-9-57 states that no sheriff, bailiff or other officer may converse with a juror or be in the jury room during deliberations unless otherwise ordered by the Court. Any officer that does converse with the jury or enters the jury room during deliberations is guilty of contempt of court and may be sentenced to the county jail for one week.

Despite these preventive measures, and all efforts made to prevent the jury from hearing improper matters, it still sometimes happens. More often than not, this is not discovered until after the accused has been convicted. In those cases, depending on the circumstances, this may result in the conviction being reversed and the defendant granted a new trial.

If you have questions about criminal law in Mississippi, or need a Mississippi criminal lawyer, please contact us for a free case evaluation. You may also visit our Jackson Mississippi criminal defense website for more information.

In Mississippi drug cases, the police frequently use informants to get information or buy drugs from people suspected of selling drugs and controlled substances. In any drug case where an informant is involved, the defendant must have a lawyer who knows how to investigate informants. Information uncovered about the informant's background can provide information that can be used to attack the informant's credibility at trial. In some instances, this information may result in the case being dismissed altogether.

Confidential informants and snitches are inherently unworthy of belief or trust. Many informants will lie, cheat, and steal to get an advantage. Because of this tendency to lie, the informant's backgroung must be thoroughly investigated.

In a perfect world, law enforcement would look into an informant's backgroung before using him as an informant. Things such as the informant's criminal history, drug use, current warrants or fugitive status, true identity, fingerprints and code names and aliases would be documented. Also, records of payments made to the informant, as well as prior false statements made by the informant would be noted and filed. Unfortunately, most narcotics agents do not investigate informants this thoroughly. Even those agents who do perform a detailed investigation will not freely disclose this information to the defense.

It is therefore the job of the defense attorney to perform this investigation. Many informants have long criminal records, and are drug addicts. Juries are not likely to believe the testimony of a career-criminal informant, and are even less likely to believe the testimony of a drug addict. These facts can cause the jury to disbelieve the testimony of the informant, or may cause the prosecutor to dismiss the case before it ever goes to trial. This is especially true where the State's entire case depends upon the informant's testimony. In order to use this information, however, defense counsel must take immediate action to complete the investigation.

If you have been charged with a crime involving an informant, please contact me to discuss your case. We believe the defense investigation is where most criminal cases are won, long before they ever reach the courtroom. For more information, please visit our Mississippi criminal lawyer website for additional information.

The most important part of a Mississippi criminal trial is jury selection. The twelve citizens who are chosen to serve on a jury are charged with deciding the fate of the accused. It is vitally important that the defense select those jurors who are most likely to be sympathetic to the defendant, and most likely to favor our arguments. Of course, the State is trying to select a jury that is likely to convict the defendant.

For many years, prosecutors intentionally discriminated against African-American jurors. Many prosecutors believed (and still believe) in the sterotype that black jurors were more likely to return a not guilty verdict than their white counterparts. In 1986, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that discriminating against jurors on the basis of race was illegal. The case that sought to put an end to this practice was Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986).

The Court held in Batson that it violated the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution for the prosecutor to strike potential jurors just because of their race. The Court also set forth a procedure for the defendant to show race discrimination in jury selection. Even though this has been the law of the land for 24 years, some prosecutors still exclude jurors based on their race. For these reasons, Mississippi criminal lawyers must be vigilent to detect whether a prosecutor is striking only jurors of a particular race. Once counsel realizes the prosecutor is engaging in this type of discrimination, he must take action to stop it. If the defense lawyer does not follow the procedure for bringing this misconduct to the trial court's attention, the defendant will be deemed to have waived any objection to the prosecutor's actions.

When a Mississippi criminal lawyer realizes that the State is discriminating against jurors on the basis of race, he must immediately make an objection. However, simply objecting is not enough. After making an objection, defense counsel must introduce the following evidence into the Court record:

1. Defense counsel must show that the defendant is part of a "cognizable racial group." This means that the record must show the defendant's race. This can be proven by the defendant's lawyer simply asking the Court to allow the record to reflect that the defendant is of a particular race. While this is the simplest fact to show, many lawyers overlook this crucial requirement.

2. The defendant's attorney must then show that the prosecutor used his challenges to remove members of a particular race from the jury. One way to show discrimination is to demonstrate that all the prosecutor's challenges have been used on jurors of the same race. In order to do this, defense counsel must have the record reflect the identity of each stricken juror and the juror's race. This will usually satisfy the defendant's burden of proof.

3. Finally, defense counsel must show that the circumstances raise an inference that the prosecutor is striking these potential jurors to exclude members of a particular race. Many courts will accept the same proof detailed above to establish this fact.

If the defendant establishes each of these elements, the burden will then shift to the prosecutor to show that he had a "race-neutral" reason for striking the jurors. Race-neutral means that the prosecutor's reason for striking the jurors had nothing whatsoever to do with race.

After the judge listens to the prosecutor's alleged race-neutral reasons, he will decide whether those reasons are sufficient. If the judge accepts those race-neutral reasons, he will overrule the defendant's objection. However, if the judge does not accept the race neutral reason given by the prosecutor, he will disallow the challenge and place the juror back on the jury.

This can result in jurors who are favorable to the defense being placed back on the jury. In order to take advantage of this procedure, the defendant's lawyer has to pay close attention to the prosecutor's use of challenges, and then meticulously put on the proof necessary to get the trial judge to place the jurors back on the jury. If defense counsel does not do this, not only will the objection be ovveruled, but he will lose the right to argue this issue on appeal.

Under Mississippi criminal statutes, it is unlawful for a person to sell or be in possession of any drugs, controlled substances or narcotics in any correctional facility. The term correctional facility includes state prisons and facilities, and any county or city jail. This law also makes it illegal for a correctional officer, jailer or other person who works at the facility to "knowingly permit" drugs to be sold or possessed inside the facility. This law can be found at Mississippi Code Section 47-5-198.

A person convicted of selling or possessing a controlled substance in a correctional facility or jail faces a prison term of three (3) to seven (7) years, and a fine of up to $25,000.00.

The State has a compelling interest in keeping narcotics out of jails and correctional facilities. Authorities at these facilities are always on the lookout for visitors who may be bringing drugs inside the jail. Visitors are normally caught in the act when they enter a correctional facility. Sometimes, however, an inmate looking to "trade up" will tell authorities that someone is bringing drugs into the facility. A good example of this situation is State v. Jackson, 962 So.2d 649 (Miss.App. 2007).

In Jackson, an inmate told authorities that his defense lawyer, Jackson, was bringing marijuana into the jail and giving it to the inmate to sell to other inmates. The inmate would then give Jackson the proceeds from the drug sales to pay toward his legal fees. Officers equipped the inmate with a video recorder and sent him to meet with Jackson. The officers also gave the inmate 50 marked One-dollar bills to give to Jackson. During the meeting, Jackson gave the inmate a bag of marijuana, and the inmate gave Jackson the marked money. Jackson then left the jail without incident.

The next day, Jackson returned to the jail to meet with the inmate again. When Jackson arrived at the jail, he was arrested. Officers asked Jackson to empty his pockets. When Jackson emptied his pockets, he still had the "buy money" in his possession. Based upon these facts, the Mississippi Court of Appeals held that the evidence was sufficient to support Jackson's conviction for sale of a controlled substance in a correctional facility.

There are many ways for law enforcement to catch visitors or officers bringing drugs into a prison or jail. Fortunately, there are also many defenses to this crime. If you've been charged with possession of a controlled substance in a correctional facility in Mississippi, please contact me. I'm a former Deputy Sheriff, and am ready to help. There is no charge for an initial consultation.

Many Mississippi criminal laws make it illegal to engage in conduct that interferes with or obstructs the administration of justice. One of these criminal statutes prohibits conduct designed to intimidate a witness, judge or juror in a legal proceeding.

Pursuant to Mississippi law, if any person, through the use of threats, force or abuse, attempts to intimidate or influence a witness, judge, juror or potential juror in the discharge of his or her duties, or by such force, abuse or reprisals or threats thereof after the performance of such duties, or attempts to obstruct or impede the administration of justice in any court, he shall, upon conviction, be punished by imprisonment not less than one (1) month in the county jail nor more than two (2) years in the state penitentiary or by a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars ($500.00), or both such fine and imprisonment. Mississippi Code Section 97-9-55.

Most cases decided by the Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals that deal with this statute have involved witness intimidation. One such witness intimidation case is Ott v. v. State, 742 So.2d 1197 (Miss.App. 1999). In Ott, two confidential informants introduced Ott to an undercover narcotics agent. Ott sold drugs to the agent, and was arrested and charged with sale of a controlled substance shortly thereafter. The day after his arrest, Ott was hanging out at a park with a group of men. The two informants were in the group. Ott announced to the group that he was going to find out who snitched on him, and kill them and their families. After Ott made these threatening remarks, the informants reported the threats to law enforcement. Police arrested Ott and charged him with witness intimidation. Under these facts, the Mississippi Court of Appeals found that the proof was sufficient to convict Ott of witness intimidation.

Mississippi courts have also decided a case involving intimidation of a judge. In Hearn v. State, 3 So.3d 722 (Miss. 2008), the defendant wrote more than 100 letters to two circuit judges who had presided over his prior criminal cases. The letters contained bizarre and profane language. After the defendant wrote these letters, he told his psychologist that he intended to harm these judges after he was released from prison. The psychologist informed the judges of this threat. Later, the defendant appeared before the Mississippi Parole Board and repeated his intent to cause harm to the judges upon his release. The defendant was tried and convicted of intimidating a judge. The Court held that the defendant clearly intended to intimidate the judges by this behavior, and the proof was sufficient to support the conviction.

Mississippi law has also given guidance on what type of conduct is not intimidation of a judge. For example, criticizing or arguing with a judge, standing alone, is not "intimidation" under the statute.

If you have been accused of or charged with witness intimidation, please contact Jackson, MS criminal attorney Curt Crowley for a free case evaluation. You can contact us at 601.944.1984. You may also visit our Jackson, Mississippi criminal defense website for additional information.

Mississippi law provides that proceedings before a grand jury are to be kept secret for a specified period of time.

Mississippi Code Section 97-9-53 states that grand jurors, witnesses, district attorneys, court clerks, sheriffs, or other officers of the court, may not disclose the fact that the grand jury has issued an indictment against a defendant, or disclose any action or proceeding relating to such an indictment, before the finding of the indictment, or in six months after the finding of the indictment, or until after the indictment has been served upon the defendant.

A witness may not disclose the substance of his grand jury testimony, or even that he was a witness before the grand jury. This prohibition includes a witness answering questions such as whether testimony in other legal proceedings is the same or consistent with testimony he gave before the grand jury. In re Knapp, 536 So.2d 1330 (Miss. 1988).

There are a number of reasons Mississippi criminal law makes grand jury proceedings secret. By their nature, grand juries investigate crimes. Mississippi law provides for secrecy of the proceedings in order to avoid compromising criminal investigations. Grand juries also hear testimony from or about witnesses to crimes and confidential informants. Secrecy is important in order to protect these witnesses and informants from harm, threats and retaliation. Finally, grand jury proceedings are kept secret because if a defendant discovers he has been indicted, or is about to be indicted, he may flee the jurisdiction of the Court before law enforcement has an opportunity to serve the indictment upon him and have sufficient bail posted.

If you have served on a grand jury or have given testimony before a grand jury, it is very important that you keep quiet about anything relating to the grand jury proceedings. If you are confronted with a situation where you are confused about whether you should disclose information regarding the grand jury, you should contact an experienced Mississippi criminal lawyer to discuss the specific issues involved in your particular situation.

A recent statutory rape case in the Circuit Court of Hinds County highlights the unfairness of Mississippi's statutory rape law, and the dangers of online chat.

The Clarion-Ledger reported that a 29 year-old Hinds County man plead guilty to one count of statutory rape of a 14 year-old child. According to the article, the victim entered an online chatroom and solicited the defendant for sex. The victim lied to the defendant and told him that she was 19 years-old. Based on this misrepresentation, the defendant agreed to meet the victim at a motel. They met at the hotel several hours later and had sex.

An investigation revealed that before she solicited the defendant, the victim had gone online and solicited another adult male for sex. She sneaked out of the house to meet the first guy, but they got into an argument and did not have sex with each other.

As a result of his guilty plea, the defendant was sentenced to ten (10) years in prison. Fortunately, all ten (10) years of the sentence was suspended. However, the defendant will be required to register as a sex offender.

How could this man be guilty of statutory rape?

Some would ask exactly how the defendant could be convicted of statutory rape. It's a legitimate question, considering the facts of the case. The undisputed proof was (1) the "victim" solicited the adult for sex, (2) the "victim" lied to the adult about her age, (3) the sex was completely consensual, and (4) the "victim" tried to pull the same stunt with another adult male just hours before she successfully convinced the defendant to meet her for sex.

Considering all of this evidence, it defies logic and good sense that the defendant could be convicted of statutory rape. However, under Mississippi's patently illogical and unfair statutory rape law, the defendant was guilty of this crime. Here's why the defendant was guilty:

Statutory Rape Under Mississippi Law

Under Mississippi Code Section 97-3-65, statutory rape is committed when:

(1) a person 17 years of age or older;
(2) has sexual intercourse with a person who is at least 14, but less than 16, years-old; and
(3) the parties to the act are not married.

In a statutory rape case, this is all the prosecutor has to prove. If each of these elements are proven beyond a reasonable doubt, a person can be convicted of this crime.

In the case cited above, the defendant was 29, and the victim was 14, so the age elements were not in dispute. The defendant also admitted that sexual intercourse took place. Consequently, the State could prove all the elements of statutory rape.

What about the victim lying about her age?

Even though the State could prove all the elements of the crime, it still seems wrong that the defendant could be convicted of statutory rape, considering the victim lied about her age. While this notion might offend one's sense of right-and-wrong, the fact that the victim lied about her age is not a defense to a charge of statutory rape.

Mississippi appellate courts have repeatedly held that the defendant's mistake about the victim's age is not a defense to a charge of statutory rape. Darden v. State, 798 So.2d 632 (Miss.App. 2001). No matter how reasonable the defendant's belief that the victim was above the age of consent, this will not provide a defense to this charge. It is also irrelevant how old or mature the victim looked or acted.

Even where the victim knowingly lies about her age, the defendant is still guilty of statutory rape. Sanders v. State, 825 So.2d 53 (Miss.App. 2002); Daniels v. State, 742 So.2d 1140 (Miss. 1999).

Under the current state of the law, a defendant is not entitled to rely on the victim's representations regarding her age. The fact that the victim lied does not provide a defense. Taken to its logical conclusion, a victim could conceivably go so far as to show the defendant a counterfeit ID showing that she was above the age of consent, and the defendant would still be convicted of statutory rape.

What about the fact that the victim initiated the conversation and solicited sex from the defendant?

Consent of the victim is not a defense to a charge of statutory rape. Phillipson v. State, 943 So.2d 670 (Miss. 2006). No matter how much the victim participated in the act, or how enthusiastic she was for the event to take place, this simply will not provide a defense to statutory rape.

Unfair and Unjust

Under the law, the defendant in this article was guilty. Regardless, this seems to be an unfair and unjust result, in light of the victim's solicitations and lies about her age.

Application of the statutory rape law in this case does not appear to serve the purpose of the law in the first place. Mississippi's statutory rape law is designed to protect children from being exploited for sex, regardless of their consent, because children simply cannot appreciate the significance or consequences of their actions. Phillipson v. State, 943 So.2d 670 (Miss. 2006).

Protection of children who do not understand the consequences of the decision to have sex is a laudable goal. However, that goal was not served by charging the defendant with statutory rape. The "victim" in this case fully understood the significance and consequences of her actions. She solicited the defendant online, lied about her age, made arrangements to meet the defendant at the motel, and had sex with him. She also tried the same thing with another man before she hooked the defendant. In this case, I submit that the "victim" was not a victim at all. She was the actual predator. She knew exactly what she was doing and hardly needed the protection of the law.

This is the problem with the statutory rape statute. There is no defense or "safety valve" to cover circumstances like those presented in this case. As a result, a man was convicted of a sex crime, and forever branded a sex offender. Under these facts, this is a manifest injustice.

Statutory rape cases are tough, but many are still defensible. Defending a statutory rape case in Mississippi requires unique tactics and intensive pretrial investigation and preparation. If you have questions about statutory rape cases or other sex crimes in Mississippi, please contact us. All inquires are held in the strictest confidence, and there is no charge for an initial consultation.