Billy Ray Robinson v. State of Mississippi
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
NO. 2009-KA-00414-COA
BILLY RAY ROBINSON
APPELLANT
v.
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
DATE OF JUDGMENT:
TRIAL JUDGE:
COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED:
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT:
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE:
DISTRICT ATTORNEY:
NATURE OF THE CASE:
TRIAL COURT DISPOSITION:
DISPOSITION:
MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED:
MANDATE ISSUED:
APPELLEE
01/17/2008
HON. ROBERT G. EVANS
SIMPSON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
JUSTIN TAYLOR COOK
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
BY: CHARLES W. MARIS, JR.
EDDIE H. BOWEN
CRIMINAL - FELONY
CONVICTED OF SALE OF COCAINE AND
SENTENCED TO TEN YEARS IN THE
CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
AFFIRMED: 04/06/2010
BEFORE LEE, P.J., IRVING, GRIFFIS AND ISHEE, JJ.
GRIFFIS, J., FOR THE COURT:
¶1.
On October 10, 2007, Billy Ray Robinson was convicted in Simpson County Circuit
Court of the sale of cocaine. He was sentenced to ten years in the custody of the Mississippi
Department of Corrections. Robinson filed a motion for a judgment notwithstanding the
verdict or, in the alternative, a new trial, which the court denied. From this conviction,
Robinson now appeals. We find no error and affirm.
¶2.
On October 19, 2005, Mississippi Bureau of Narcotics agents met with a confidential
informant named Stacy James. At the meeting, James agreed to participate in an undercover
operation to buy illicit drugs from drug dealers in Magee, Mississippi. James’s car was
outfitted with audio-video recording equipment and the agents gave James a body wire to
wear and official state funds with which to purchase drugs. James left the meeting with the
agents and drove to Magee.
¶3.
James stopped his car in front of a yard on North Raleigh Street in Magee, and
Robinson approached the passenger side of James’s vehicle. James asked Robinson for
drugs. Robinson got into James’s vehicle and sat on the passenger side. Robinson gave
James directions. Robinson directed James to an area where Robinson could buy drugs.
¶4.
James asked Robinson to purchase crack cocaine and gave him $20. Robinson left
the car. He brought back a crack cocaine rock for James. The video surveillance recorded
the exchange of the crack cocaine between James and Robinson.
¶5.
James returned to the agents and gave them the alleged crack cocaine and the audio-
video recording equipment. When tested, the substance contained 0.2 grams of cocaine.
Robinson was arrested on November 1, 2006, and was charged with the unlawful sale of
cocaine.
¶6.
Robinson’s counsel filed a brief pursuant to Lindsey v. State, 939 So. 2d 743 (Miss.
2005). Robinson has not filed a pro se supplemental brief.
¶7.
Pursuant to Lindsey, it is the appellate counsel’s responsibility to determine that his
client’s case presents no arguable issues on appeal; to file a brief showing that counsel has
2
thoroughly reviewed the record and has found nothing to support an appeal; and, to send his
client a copy of the brief, informing his client that he found no arguable issue for appeal and
advising him of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief. Id. at 748 (¶18). If the defendant
raises any arguable issue in his pro se brief or if the appellate court finds any arguable issues
upon its independent review of the record, the appellate court must, if circumstances warrant,
require counsel to file a supplemental brief of the issue. Id.
¶8.
Here, Robinson’s attorney indicated that he diligently searched the procedural and
factual history of this action and scoured the record searching for any arguable issues that
could be presented in good faith, but he found none. Robinson’s attorney asserted that he
examined: (1) the reason for the arrest and the circumstances surrounding the arrest of
Robinson; (2) any possible violations of Robinson’s right to counsel; (3) the entire transcript
and content of the record; (4) all rulings of the trial court; (5) possible procedural
misconduct; (6) all jury instructions; (7) all exhibits, whether admitted into evidence or not;
(8) possible misapplication of the law in sentencing; (9) the indictment and all the pleadings
in the record; (10) any possible ineffective assistance of counsel issues; and (11) whether the
verdict is supported by the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
¶9.
Robinson’s counsel requested that this Court allow an additional forty days for
Robinson to file a pro se supplemental brief, should he so desire. Robinson’s counsel stated
that he sent a copy of his brief and correspondence informing Robinson that he found no
arguable issues in the record and that Robinson had a right to file a pro se brief.
¶10.
As of this date, this Court has not received any supplemental filing by Robinson.
3
Furthermore, after thoroughly reviewing the record, we have found no arguable issues for
our review. Therefore, in lieu of any error which warrants reversal, we must affirm.
McClain v. State, 928 So. 2d 210, 211 (¶8) (Miss. Ct. App. 2006) (citing Eaton v. State, 913
So. 2d 413, 416 (¶6) (Miss. Ct. App. 2005)).
¶11. THE JUDGMENT OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF SIMPSON COUNTY OF
CONVICTION OF SALE OF COCAINE AND SENTENCE OF TEN YEARS IN THE
CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS IS
AFFIRMED. ALL COSTS OF THIS APPEAL ARE ASSESSED TO SIMPSON
COUNTY.
KING, C.J., LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., IRVING, BARNES, ISHEE, ROBERTS
AND MAXWELL, JJ., CONCUR.
4
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.
