Terrance Bindon v. State of Mississippi
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
NO. 2002-KA-00739-COA
TERRANCE BINDON
APPELLANT
v.
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
APPELLEE
DATE OF TRIAL COURT 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:
CERTIORARI FILED:
MANDATE ISSUED:
3/26/2002
HON. FORREST A. JOHNSON, JR.
ADAMS COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
WILLIAM E. GOODWIN
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
BY: JOHN R. HENRY
RONNIE LEE HARPER
CRIMINAL - FELONY
CONVICTED OF POSSESSION OF MORE
THAN ONE-TENTH OF A GRAM BUT LESS
THAN TWO GRAMS OF COCAINE AND
SENTENCED AS AN HABITUAL OFFENDER TO
SERVE SIXTEEN YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF
THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS WITHOUT POSSIBILITY OF
PAROLE.
AFFIRMED - 09/16/2003
BEFORE KING, P.J., BRIDGES AND LEE, JJ.
LEE, J., FOR THE COURT:
PROCEDURAL HISTORY AND FACTS
¶1.
On the night of August 3, 2000, Terrance Bindon was stopped by two Adams County Sheriff's
Department officers for driving without headlights or taillights. Bindon got out of his vehicle, and the officers
testified they smelled marijuana. One of the officers noticed marijuana seeds lying in the car, and he did
a "patdown" of Bindon to check for weapons. At that time, Bindon reached down and pulled something
out of his pants and dropped the object into an opening in the trunk of his car. The officers ordered Bindon
to retrieve the object, which he did, and the envelope proved to contain cocaine.
¶2.
Bindon was later charged with possession of cocaine. After a trial in March 2002, a jury convicted
him of the charge for which he was indicted, and he was subsequently sentenced as an habitual offender
to serve sixteen years in prison without the possibility of parole.
¶3.
Bindon appeals to this Court arguing that the verdict was against the overwhelming weight of the
evidence. We review his brief and find no merit; thus, we affirm.
DISCUSSION
I. WAS THE VERDICT AGAINST THE OVERWHELMING WEIGHT OF THE
EVIDENCE?
¶4.
With his sole issue, Bindon argues that the jury's verdict was against the overwhelming weight of
the evidence, and we look to our familiar standard of review:
In determining whether a jury verdict is against the overwhelming weight of the evidence,
this Court must accept as true the evidence presented as supportive of the verdict, and we
will disturb a jury verdict only when convinced that the circuit court has abused its
discretion in failing to grant a new trial or if the final result will result in an unconscionable
injustice.
Danner v. State, 748 So. 2d 844 (¶7) (Miss. Ct. App. 1999). Bindon also argues in his analysis that the
evidence was legally insufficient to support the jury's verdict. Our standard of review concerning sufficiency
of evidence states:
When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence, this Court looks to all of the evidence
before the jurors to determine whether a reasonable, hypothetical juror could find, beyond
a reasonable doubt, that the defendant is guilty. This Court will not reverse a trial judge's
2
denial of a motion for a new trial unless the verdict is so contrary to the weight of the
evidence that, if it is allowed to stand, it would sanction an unconscionable injustice.
Williams v. State, 794 So. 2d 181 (¶7) (Miss. 2001) (citations omitted).
¶5.
Bindon's debate with the jury verdict centers around the fact that the State failed to produce
scientific evidence in the form of fingerprint matches, DNA tests, or other evidence to show the envelope
retrieved from Bindon's car was indeed his. Bindon argues a reasonable hypothetical juror could not have
convicted him without this evidence; thus, he should be awarded a new trial.
¶6.
We find the evidence in the case was sufficient to support the verdict. Upon stopping Bindon,
Officer Chuck Mayfield stood back to the rear of the vehicle, but Officer Cliff Cox approached Bindon,
who had stepped out of the car leaving his door open. Officer Cox testified that he smelled marijuana
emanating from Bindon's car when Bindon exited the vehicle and left his door ajar; Officer Cox then saw
marijuana seeds in the car; Officer Cox conducted a patdown search of Bindon for weapons; Bindon, who
was standing by the trunk of the car, reached into his pants during the patdown; and, upon Officer Cox's
demand to remove his hands from his pants, Bindon shoved an object into his trunk which was bowed up
on either side apparently due to a previous wreck; Bindon then retrieved the object from the trunk upon
Officer Cox's request and gave the officers a white envelope and said, "You got me, here it is;" the
envelope contained cocaine. Bindon did not put on witnesses or evidence in his defense, but he argues that
fingerprint or DNA evidence should have been presented to show whether the envelope was indeed his.
However, both officers testified as to Bindon's possession of the envelope and/or attempt to hide it in his
trunk, thus obviating the need for further evidence of possession. We find the evidence sufficient to support
the verdict and affirm the trial court.
¶7.
THE JUDGMENT OF THE ADAMS COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT OF CONVICTION
OF POSSESSION OF COCAINE AND ENHANCED SENTENCE OF SIXTEEN YEARS IN
3
THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AS AN
HABITUAL OFFENDER IS AFFIRMED. COSTS OF THIS APPEAL ARE TAXED TO THE
APPELLANT.
McMILLIN, C.J., KING AND SOUTHWICK, P.JJ., BRIDGES, THOMAS, IRVING,
MYERS, CHANDLER AND GRIFFIS, 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.
