Roger Skinner v. State of Mississippi
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
OF THE
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
NO. 2000-KM-01781-COA
ROGER SKINNER
v.
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
DATE OF TRIAL COURT
JUDGMENT:
TRIAL JUDGE:
COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED:
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT:
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE:
DISTRICT ATTORNEY:
NATURE OF THE CASE:
TRIAL COURT DISPOSITION:
APPELLANT
APPELLEE
09/19/2000
HON. FRANK A. RUSSELL
TISHOMINGO COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
GREGORY D. KEENUM
DEREK L. HALL
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
BY: JEAN SMITH VAUGHAN
JOHN RICHARD YOUNG
CRIMINAL - MISDEMEANOR
THE DEFENDANT IS ORDERED TO PAY A FINE IN THE
AMOUNT OF $85 AND COST IN THE AMOUNT OF $51
IN THE CONVICTION OF RECKLESS DRIVING. HE IS
FURTHER FINED $798 AND AN ADDITIONAL $102 IN
COSTS FOR HIS CONVICTION IN DUI 2ND OFFENSE
OTHER SUBSTANCE.
REVERSED AND REMANDED - 03/05/2002
DISPOSITION:
MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED:
CERTIORARI FILED:
MANDATE ISSUED:
3/26/2002
BEFORE SOUTHWICK, P.J., LEE, AND CHANDLER, JJ.
CHANDLER, J., FOR THE COURT:
¶1. Roger Skinner was convicted of driving under the influence (DUI) second offense and reckless driving
in the Justice Court of Tishomingo County. Pursuant to URCCC 12.02, Skinner appealed the convictions
for a trial de novo to the Circuit Court of Tishomingo County, where he was also convicted of both charges
in a bench trial . He appeals asserting two assignments of error which both go to the DUI charge: 1) the
circuit court improperly denied his motion for a jury trial, and 2) the circuit court improperly failed to strike
testimony by the arresting officer going to a statement made by Skinner at the time of his arrest. We find the
first issue is controlling as to the disposition of this appeal and reverse and remand without addressing the
second issue.
FACTS
¶2. On the evening of April 9, 1998, Officer Jerry Boyd of the Mississippi State Highway Patrol was
dispatched to investigate a parked car alongside Highway 25 in Tishomingo County. Boyd determined that
Skinner had pulled onto the Highway from a convenience store and lost control of his car, running off of the
road approximately fifteen feet from the convenience store parking lot. Boyd found Skinner to be
"disoriented," and he "was under the driver's seat." Boyd then arrested Skinner, but he at no time advised
him of his Miranda rights. At some point after being taken into custody, Boyd questioned Skinner, and
Boyd testified that Skinner stated, "he had been taking some, I want to say some Darvocets for pain. I think
it was he told me, I want to say Darvocet, Larvocet, some kind of drug he was taking."
¶3. Skinner was convicted of DUI second offense and reckless driving in justice court and appealed to the
circuit court. At the commencement of trial his attorney stated:
this Defendant has a right to a jury trial because this is a matter which carries a potential penalty of a
fine between $600 and $1500 and possible imprisonment greater than six months in jail. And I simply
want the record to show that we have not waived our right to a jury trial.
THE COURT: It will so reflect. Pursuant to Mississippi Uniform Circuit Court Rules he is not going to
get a jury trial today. Proceed.
During the bench trial that then took place, Skinner moved to strike Boyd's statement as to the pain
medication. The circuit court overruled that motion.
ANALYSIS
¶4. The issue presented in this case, as to whether a defendant charged with DUI second offense under
Mississippi Code Annotated Section 63-11-30 (2) (b) (Supp. 2001) has a right to a jury trial, was
addressed by our supreme court in Harkins v. State, 735 So. 2d 317, 318 (Miss. 1999) (citations
omitted.).
Uniform Rules of Circuit and County Court Practice 12.02(c) provides in part that "[i]n appeals from
justice or municipal court when the maximum possible sentence is six months or less, the case may be
tried without a jury at the court's discretion . . ." Rule 12.02(c) thus only grants the trial court
discretion to deny a defendant's request for a jury trial in cases in which the maximum possible
sentence is six months or less. This provision is based upon United States Supreme Court decisions
presumption that offenses carrying maximum sentences of six months or less are "petty offenses" to
which the Sixth Amendment right to trial by jury does not apply.
The Harkins court reversed and remanded a conviction when a trial court denied the request for a jury trial
under the same facts and law present in this case. Id. Therefore, we reverse and remand the conviction of
DUI second offense for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
¶5. THE JUDGMENT OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF TISHOMINGO COUNTY IS
REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR PROCEEDINGS NOT INCONSISTENT WITH THIS
OPINION. COSTS ARE ASSESSED TO TISHOMINGO COUNTY.
McMILLIN, C.J., KING AND SOUTHWICK, P.JJ., BRIDGES, THOMAS, LEE,
IRVING, MYERS AND BRANTLEY, 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.
