Jerome Collier v. State of Mississippi
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
OF THE
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
NO. 1999-KA-01118-COA
JEROME COLLIER
v.
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
APPELLANT
APPELLEE
DATE OF JUDGMENT:
04/29/1999
TRIAL JUDGE:
HON. ELZY JONATHAN SMITH JR.
COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: TUNICA COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT:
ALLAN D. SHACKELFORD
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE:
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
BY: DEWITT T. ALLRED III
DISTRICT ATTORNEY:
LAURENCE Y. MELLEN
NATURE OF THE CASE:
CRIMINAL - FELONY
TRIAL COURT DISPOSITION:
04/29/1999: ROBBERY - SENTENCED TO SERVE A
TERM OF 8 YEARS IN AN INSTITUTION UNDER THE
SUPERVISION AND CONTROL OF MDOC.
TO RUN CONSECUTIVE TO ANY AND ALL
SENTENCES PREVIOUSLY IMPOSED.
AFFIRMED - 2/20/2001
DISPOSITION:
MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED:
CERTIORARI FILED:
MANDATE ISSUED:
3/13/2001
BEFORE McMILLIN, C.J., BRIDGES, AND MYERS, JJ.
McMILLIN, C.J., FOR THE COURT:
¶1. Jerome Collier, convicted of robbery by a Tunica County Circuit Court jury, has appealed that
conviction to this Court claiming that the verdict of guilty was against the weight of the evidence. We find
Collier's appeal to be without merit and affirm the conviction.
¶2. The State presented evidence that Collier, along with an accomplice, arrived by automobile at a
convenience gas mart in Tunica County, after which Collier entered the store on the pretext of borrowing
the telephone. Collier's companion, identified as Davien Stokes, then entered the store with a ski mask
pulled over his face and holding one hand behind his back in an apparent effort to make it appear that he
was armed. The store clerk heeded Stoke's command to hand over the money in the cash register. The
clerk testified at trial that Stokes ordered him to give the money to Collier. Stokes, testifying on behalf of the
State at Collier's trial, said only that Collier grabbed the money from the clerk. After obtaining the funds,
Collier and Stokes fled the store together and sped away in a vehicle driven by Stokes. They were
apprehended within minutes of the robbery. Collier, riding in the passenger seat at the time police officers
stopped the vehicle, was discovered to have his shoes off. Officers searching the vehicle discovered a pair
of shoes with several hundred dollars in cash stuffed into one of them.
¶3. The defense rested without calling any witnesses.
¶4. Collier concedes on appeal that the State presented sufficient evidence implicating him in the crime to
create a jury issue. Therefore, he does not seek to have his conviction reversed and rendered based on
legally insufficient evidence to establish one or more of the essential elements of the charge of robbery. See,
e.g., Vaughan v. State, 759 So. 2d 1092 (¶19) (Miss. 1999). Rather, Collier limits himself to a claim that
the verdict was against the weight of the evidence - a proposition which, if found to have merit by this
Court, would require us to reverse the conviction and remand the case to the circuit court for a possible
new trial. Boyd v. State, 754 So. 2d 586 (¶11) (Miss. Ct. App. 2000).
¶5. A claim that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence must be first submitted to the trial court in a
post-verdict motion for new trial. URCCC 10.05, Lockridge v. State, 768 So. 2d 331 (¶17) (Miss. Ct.
App. 2000). The trial court has substantial discretion in weighing such a claim and is charged to grant a new
trial if, after reviewing all the evidence in the light most favorable to upholding the verdict, the court is
convinced that to permit the guilty verdict to stand would constitute a manifest injustice. Id. If the trial court
denies the new trial motion and that denial is urged as error on appeal, the appellate court must review all
the evidence in the same light and may reverse only if the court determines that the trial court abused its
discretion in denying the defendant a new trial. Id.
¶6. In this case, Collier quibbles over discrepancies in the testimony of the store clerk and Collier's
accomplice, Stokes, as to how many times Collier entered the store. Stokes testified that Collier entered
once, for the apparent purpose of assessing the suitability of the store for the proposed robbery, and then
re-entered after he and Stokes had consulted outside to finalize the robbery plans based on Collier's
scouting efforts. The store clerk, on the other hand, was unable to say with any certainty that Collier had
entered the store more than once - that being the time the actual robbery was committed.
¶7. Collier points out that an accomplice's testimony must be viewed with suspicion. Jones v. State, 740
So. 2d 904 (¶17) (Miss. 1999). From that premise, Collier would have this court conclude that the clerk's
version is the more likely and that evidence that Collier only entered the store once is consistent with his
theory of the case that he had merely caught a ride with Stokes and was as surprised as the clerk when
Stokes proceeded to rob the store. Collier's argument appears to focus in on the notion that it was crucial
to the State's case to show that Collier entered the store twice in order to prove his actual participation in
the robbery since he was not the one who actually demanded money from the clerk.
¶8. The most apparent problem with Collier's argument is that he presented no evidence at trial to support
his theory of the case. The jury, in assessing the evidence put before it, is entitled to draw reasonable
inferences from the evidence. In this case, we are satisfied that (a) the facts that Collier arrived at the store
with Stokes, (b) that Collier accepted the money tendered by the store clerk on Stokes's demand, (c) that
Collier fled the store in the company of Stokes, and (d) that the money derived from the robbery was
discovered concealed in Collier's shoe was enough for the jury to conclude that Collier was a willing
participant in the crime whether he entered the store once or twice on the night in question. Of course, there
was, in addition to that evidence and the inference of Collier's willing participation that could be drawn from
it, the direct testimony of Stokes that he and Collier planned the robbery in advance of arriving at the store
and that everything done by Collier was in furtherance of the robbery plan. The fact that an accomplice's
testimony must be viewed with heightened suspicion does not mean that it loses all probative value. Stokes's
testimony was, in all essential details, consistent with other evidence of what transpired during the robbery.
It was not improbable nor was it impeached by cross-examination or other means, and, if accepted by the
jury as true, substantially implicated Collier in the crime.
¶9. We are satisfied, beyond question, that the guilty verdict in this case was not contrary to the weight of
the credible evidence presented to the jury for its consideration.
¶10. THE JUDGMENT OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF TUNICA COUNTY OF CONVICTION
OF ROBBERY AND SENTENCE OF EIGHT YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE
MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS TO RUN CONSECUTIVELY TO ANY
AND ALL SENTENCES PREVIOUSLY IMPOSED IS AFFIRMED. COSTS OF THIS APPEAL
ARE ASSESSED TO TUNICA COUNTY.
KING AND SOUTHWICK, P.JJ., PAYNE, BRIDGES, THOMAS, LEE, IRVING,
MYERS AND CHANDLER, JJ., CONCUR.
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.
