Sam Bradford, Sr. v. State of Mississippi
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
NO. 2004-KA-00564-COA
SAM BRADFORD, SR.
APPELLANT
v.
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
DATE OF JUDGMENT:
TRIAL JUDGE:
COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED:
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT:
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE:
NATURE OF THE CASE:
TRIAL COURT DISPOSITION:
DISPOSITION:
MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED:
MANDATE ISSUED:
APPELLEE
2/10/2004
HON. LAMAR PICKARD
JEFFERSON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
M. A. BASS, JR.
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
BY: JOHN R. HENRY
ALEXANDER C. MARTIN, DISTRICT
ATTORNEY
CRIMINAL - FELONY
CONVICTED OF MURDER AND SENTENCED TO
SERVE THE REMAINDER OF HIS NATURAL LIFE
WITH THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS.
AFFIRMED: 09/06/2005
BEFORE LEE, P.J., GRIFFIS AND ISHEE, JJ.
GRIFFIS, J., FOR THE COURT:
¶1.
Sam Bradford, Sr. appeals his conviction of murder and sentence of life in prison. He argues that
the verdict was against the overwhelming weight of the evidence. We find no error and affirm.
FACTS
¶2.
On August 31, 2003, the Jefferson County Sheriff’s Department received a phone call from
Bradford who said he had just shot his wife. Upon arriving at the scene, Sheriff Peter Walker found the
body of Althea Bradford lying in the driveway with four shell casings nearby. Althea Bradford died from
a gunshot wound to her head. The .38 caliber handgun used in the shooting was in Bradford’s possession.
Bradford was arrested.
¶3.
A Jefferson County jury found Bradford guilty of murder and sentenced him to serve the remainder
of his life in the Mississippi Department of Corrections. Bradford filed a motion for judgment
notwithstanding the verdict or, in the alternative, a new trial, which was denied by the trial court. Bradford
now appeals to this Court.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
¶4.
In determining whether a jury verdict is against the overwhelming weight of the evidence, this Court
must accept as true the evidence which supports the verdict and will reverse only when convinced that the
circuit court has abused its discretion in failing to grant a new trial. Montana v. State, 822 So. 2d 954,
967 (¶61) (Miss. 2002). Only in those cases where the verdict is so contrary to the overwhelming weight
of the evidence that to allow it to stand would sanction an unconscionable injustice will this Court disturb
it on appeal. Id. at 967-68.
ANALYSIS
¶5.
Bradford argues that the verdict was against the overwhelming weight of the evidence. He claims
that no reasonable jury could have been convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty of
anything other than manslaughter. Bradford asks this Court to reverse his murder conviction and remand
for re-sentencing based upon the crime of manslaughter.
¶6.
Mississippi Code Annotated Section 97-3-19(1)(a) (Rev. 2000) defines murder as “[t]he killing
of a human being without authority of law by any means or in any manner . . . [w]hen done with deliberate
2
design to effect the death of the person killed, or of any human being. . . .” “Deliberate design” is
synonymous with malice aforethought. Hearvey v. State, 887 So. 2d 836, 839 (¶5) (Miss. Ct. App.
2004).
¶7.
Mississippi Code Annotated Section 97-3-35 (Rev. 2000) defines manslaughter as “[t]he killing
of a human being, without malice, in the heat of passion, but in a cruel or unusual manner, or by the use of
a dangerous weapon, without authority of law, and not in necessary self-defense.” The chief distinction
between murder and manslaughter is the presence of deliberation and malice in murder and its absence in
manslaughter. Berry v. State, 575 So. 2d 1, 10 (Miss. 1990); Carter v. State, 25 So. 2d 470, 473
(Miss. 1946). A homicide may result from a wilful act or deliberate design without being murder if the
killing occurs in necessary self-defense or results from an act committed in the heat of passion without
malice aforethought.
¶8.
Bradford claims that the evidence presented at trial supported heat of passion manslaughter, not
malice aforethought. We disagree.
¶9.
Bradford did not kill his wife in the heat of passion. The record shows that following an argument
with Bradford, the victim left the marital home and went to a relative’s house. Bradford, armed with a .38
caliber handgun, followed the victim to the relative’s house and began to threaten her stating: “Mother
F*****, what you want to do? What you want to do, g** d*****? I asked you, what you want to do?
Do you want to leave or do you want to die?” Bradford then fired his gun three times, once into the ground
and then to the victim’s left and right. Subsequently, Bradford shot the victim in the head. Following the
shooting, Bradford had the presence of mind to call the police. He also had the presence of mind to
consider shooting his wife again, asking a relative, “Can I finish her off?”
3
¶10.
Heat of passion manslaughter is defined as:
A state of violent and uncontrollable rage engendered by a blow or certain other
provocation given, which will reduce a homicide from the grade of murder to that of
manslaughter. Passion or anger suddenly aroused at the time by some immediate and
reasonable provocation, by words or acts of one at the time. The term includes an
emotional state of mind characterized by anger, rage, hatred, furious resentment or terror.
Phillips v. State, 794 So. 2d 1034, 1037 (¶9) (Miss. 2001) (citations omitted). Here, there is no
evidence of “immediate and reasonable provocation” by the victim. The record indicates that in response
to Bradford’s question - “Do you want to leave or do you want to die?” - the victim stated that she wanted
to stay with him and that she wanted him. There is no evidence that the victim provoked Bradford by
yelling, cursing, or threatening him. In fact, the record shows that following the confrontation with Bradford,
the victim sat down on a step outside of a relative’s home. It was at this point that Bradford fired three
shots around the victim and then one shot into her head.
¶11.
At trial, a heat of passion jury instruction was given. It was the jury’s responsibility to determine
the grade of homicide committed by Bradford. Lester v. State, 862 So. 2d 582, 584 (¶7) (Miss. Ct. App.
2004). We find that the record supports the jury’s verdict of guilty of murder. Therefore, upon review,
we find no error.
¶12. THE JUDGMENT OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JEFFERSON COUNTY OF
CONVICTION OF MURDER AND SENTENCE TO LIFE IN THE CUSTODY OF THE
MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS IS AFFIRMED. ALL COSTS OF THIS
APPEAL ARE ASSESSED TO JEFFERSON COUNTY.
KING, C.J., BRIDGES AND LEE, P.JJ., IRVING, MYERS, CHANDLER, BARNES
AND ISHEE, JJ., CONCUR.
4
5
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
