Winslow Poe v. State of Mississippi
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
NO. 2002-KA-00742-COA
WINSLOW POE
APPELLANT
v.
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
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:
APPELLEE
5/3/2002
HON. LEE J. HOWARD
OKTIBBEHA COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
PEARSON LIDDELL
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
BY: JEFFREY A. KLINGFUSS
FORREST ALLGOOD
CRIMINAL - FELONY
FONDLING: SENTENCED TO SERVE A TERM
OF 10 YEARS IN THE MDOC
AFFIRMED: 12/09/2003
BEFORE KING, P.J., IRVING AND GRIFFIS, JJ.
KING, P.J., FOR THE COURT:
¶1.
Winslow Poe was convicted of four counts of fondling pursuant to Mississippi Code Annotated
Section 97-5-23. Poe was sentenced to ten years on each count to run concurrently in the custody of the
Mississippi Department of Corrections. Poe’s motion for a new trial was denied. Aggrieved, Poe has
appealed and asserts the following issue:
I.
That the trial court erred when it failed to grant the defendant’s motion for new trial
because the weight and sufficiency of the evidence did not rise to the level necessary to
prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed fondling against four minor
children.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
¶2.
When arrested in December of 2000, Winslow Poe was a computer teacher at Henderson
Elementary School in Starkville, Mississippi and had taught for approximately fourteen years.
¶3.
Around December 7, 2000, a sixth grade male student at Henderson Elementary reported to the
school principal, Walter Williams, that Poe had inappropriately touched him in the hallway, and that this
was not the first occurrence. Principal Williams reported the incident to one of the administrators at
Oktibbeha County School District, Dr. James Smith, and then called Poe into his office to notify him of
the allegations. The following day Principal Williams, Asylee Gardner, the guidance counselor, and Smith
called in four young men to inquire if they had been inappropriately touched by Poe. Three of the four
young men stated that Poe had groped them multiple times during school hours, in the hallway between
classes, and during the computer class that Poe taught.
¶4.
When called into the office on December 8, 2000, Poe did not deny the allegations. Witnesses
present at this conference, Dr. James Smith and Principal Walter Williams, both testified that Poe said he
might have allowed himself to get too close to the children, but that he would never hurt them and was only
trying to help them. Smith testified that Poe was “totally distraught” and admitted he had placed money in
one of the children’s pockets.
¶5.
On December 11, 2000, a social worker at the Department of Human Services notified the
Starkville Police Department that a mother had reported that her child had been molested at Henderson
Elementary by Poe. Starkville Police Department then undertook an investigation of the matter. Detective
William Durr was assigned the investigative responsibilities of this case. Durr went to Henderson to meet
2
with Poe, and was informed that Poe was not there. Later, Durr discovered that Poe had been suspended
from his teaching duties that morning. Durr found Poe at home. Poe agreed to accompany Durr to the
police station for questioning. Poe talked with Detective Durr for about an hour. Poe made a written
statement, which began: “ For a period of time I have battled some homosexual tendencies.” Poe’s
statement said that in his misguided directions he “inadvertently touched a few students in the genital area.”
He specifically named the four victims of this case as having been inadvertently touched. Poe
acknowledged that his actions were wrong and expressed remorse for what he had done and said, “I will
immediately start counseling through my pastor and church. I will avail myself for other self-help programs
available to me.”
¶6.
Poe did not testify at trial. However, his handwritten statement to Detective Durr was admitted into
evidence. Each of the four alleged victims testified that Poe touched them in the genital area. All four young
men testified that they each gave Detective Durr a statement accusing Poe of touching them in the genital
area on multiple occasions. All four statements were admitted into evidence. Two of the minor victims
testified that on numerous occasions during class, Poe would lean over and touch and/or rub on their
genitals while helping them with their work at their computer terminal.
¶7.
A jury found Poe guilty on all four counts of child fondling, and he was sentenced to a period of
ten years on each count, to run concurrently, in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections.
ISSUE AND ANALYSIS
Whether the trial court erred in denying the defendant’s motion for new trial
¶8.
Poe contends that neither the weight or the sufficiency of the evidence supports a verdict of guilty
of fondling. Poe contends that the victims lacked credibility and their testimony was inconsistent and
3
therefore incredulous. Poe suggests that the supposed lack of credibility and credulity required that he be
granted a new trial.
¶9.
A defendant who questions the sufficiency of the evidence asks the court to hold that the evidence
is so lacking that his conviction must be reversed and that he must be discharged. Holloway v. State, 809
So. 2d 598, 605 (¶21) (Miss. 2000). In addressing the question this Court
[m]ust, with respect to each element of the offense, consider all of the
evidence--not just the evidence which supports the case for the
prosecution--in the light most favorable to the verdict. The credible
evidence which is consistent with the guilt must be accepted as true. The
prosecution must be given the benefit of all favorable inferences that may
reasonably be drawn from the evidence.
Id.
¶10.
The defendant who questions the weight of the evidence merely seeks a reversal of his conviction
and a consideration of the evidence by a new fact finder. Isaac v. State, 645 So. 2d 903, 907 (Miss.
1994). When it is the weight of the evidence, this Court
[m]ust 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. 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. As such, if the verdict is against the overwhelming weight of the evidence, then
a new trial is proper.
Baker v. State, 802 So.2d 77, 81 (¶14) (Miss. 2001); citing Dudley v. State, 719 So.2d 180, 182
(Miss. 1998).
¶11.
Issues of witness credibility and the weight to be accorded a witness’s testimony are matters to be
resolved by the trier of fact. Riley v. State,797 So. 2d 285, 288 (¶12) (Miss. Ct. App. 2001). In this case
the fact finder was the jury.
4
¶12.
Each of the minor victims testified that he was fondled by Poe. The unsupported testimony of the
victim of a sex crime, which has not been discredited or contradicted by other credible evidence, is
sufficient to support a guilty verdict. Williams v. State, 757 So. 2d 953, 957 (¶17) (Miss.1999); Collier
v. State, 711 So. 2d 458, 462 (¶15) (Miss. 1998). In this case the testimony of the minor victims is
corroborated and given credence by Poe’s statement to the police.
¶13.
In that statement, Poe admitted that he was battling homosexual tendencies, that he touched the
genital area of each of the minor victims, that he knew his actions were wrong and that he felt great remorse
for his actions. These admissions by Poe mitigate any inconsistencies in the testimony of the victims, and
provided sufficient corroborative evidence to support a verdict of guilty.
¶14.
There is no merit to Poe’s claim of error, and the convictions are affirmed.
¶15. THE JUDGMENT OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF OKTIBBEHA COUNTY OF
CONVICTION OF FOUR COUNTS OF FONDLING AND SENTENCES OF TEN YEARS ON
EACH COUNT WITH FIVE YEARS OF POST-RELEASE SUPERVISION TO BE SERVED
CONCURRENTLY IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS AND FINES OF $1,000 ON EACH COUNT IS HEREBY AFFIRMED. ALL
COSTS OF THIS APPEAL ARE TAXED TO THE APPELLANT.
McMILLIN, C.J., SOUTHWICK, P.J., BRIDGES, THOMAS, LEE, IRVING,
MYERS, CHANDLER AND GRIFFIS, JJ., CONCUR.
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.
