Almonzo Jones v. State of Mississippi
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
NO. 2002-KA-00625-COA
ALMONZO JONES A/K/A "MONZO"
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
12/10/2001
HON. KENNETH L. THOMAS
COAHOMA COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
AZKI SHAH
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
BY CHARLES W. MARIS
LAURENCE Y. MELLEN
CRIMINAL - FELONY
COUNT I: SALE OF A CONTROLLED
SUBSTANCE AND SENTENCE OF 6 YEARS;
COUNT II: POSSESSION OF A CONTROLLED
SUBSTANCE AND SENTENCE OF 6 YEARS,
ALL IN THE CUSTODY OF MDOC.
COUNT III: MISDEMEANOR C/S POSSESSION
AND FINE OF $250. SENTENCE IN COUNT II
SHALL RUN CONCURRENTLY TO SENTENCE
IN COUNT I AND CONSECUTIVELY TO ALL
SENTENCES PREVIOUSLY IMPOSED.
AFFIRMED - 04/01/2003
BEFORE SOUTHWICK, P.J., BRIDGES AND CHANDLER, JJ.
SOUTHWICK, P.J., FOR THE COURT:
¶1.
Almonzo Jones was convicted in Coahoma County Circuit Court on a multiple count indictment
for possession and sale of controlled substances. On appeal, Jones challenges the weight of the evidence
supporting the conviction. Finding no merit to his argument, we affirm.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
¶2.
On March 16, 2001, the Mississippi Bureau of Narcotics, working in conjunction with the
Coahoma County Sheriff's Department, was engaged in an undercover drug operation in Lula. Frenchie
Taylor, a confidential informant, was outfitted in an automobile equipped with audio and video surveillance
capability. Taylor was given $100 in marked funds to use for the purchase of crack cocaine. Taylor soon
encountered Almonzo Jones. When Jones approached his vehicle, Taylor requested two fifty-dollar rocks
of crack cocaine. Jones at first refused and suggested that a contact be made in Arkansas. Taylor
responded that he did not want to go that far, and Jones then instructed him to wait nearby. Jones then
ordered eighteen-year-old Kevin Hall to carry some crack to Taylor and bring the money to Jones. Hall
delivered the drugs to Taylor and received the $100.
¶3.
The completion of the transaction caused law enforcement officers to swarm to the scene. Hall
immediately obeyed the command to drop the money and surrender. Jones, however, fled. A Bureau of
Narcotics agent pursued him. As Jones ran, he took items from his pocket and threw them aside. Jones
was quickly apprehended. Among the items discarded by Jones were several bags of marijuana and a
plastic Chap Stick containing several rocks of crack cocaine.
¶4.
Jones was convicted for the sale of crack cocaine, and on separate counts for possession of a
controlled substance, one for cocaine, the other for marijuana.
DISCUSSION
2
¶5. On appeal, Jones claims that his motion for new trial should have been granted. In ruling on such an
argument, we accept as true the evidence that supports the verdict. We will set the verdict aside only if
failure to grant a new trial was an abuse of discretion or if the verdict was an unconscionable injustice.
Jones v. State, 635 So.2d 884, 887 (Miss.1994).
The basis for this admittedly high standard is our
deference to a jury’s verdict. "Any less stringent rule would denigrate the constitutional power and
responsibility of the jury in our criminal justice system." Burrell v. State, 613 So. 2d 1186, 1191 (Miss.
1993).
¶6.
Here, various witnesses testified as to the technical aspects of the undercover operation. A
videotape of the events was introduced and viewed by the jury. Confidential informant Taylor testified
about events. The agent who pursued Jones in his flight described that part of the day’s occurrences. A
forensic chemist with the Mississippi Crime Laboratory testified to the analyses undergone to prove the
substances as crack cocaine and marijuana. Kevin Hall, Jones' young assistant in the drug sale, testified
that Jones instructed him to deliver the cocaine to Taylor and return the money. A post-arrest statement
in which Jones admitted to conducting the sale was admitted into evidence. Hall's physical delivery of the
drugs does not insulate Jones from guilt. Hollins v. State, 799 So. 2d 118, 121-22 (Miss. Ct. App. 2001).
¶7.
Finally, Jones' attempt on appeal to discredit Hall's trial testimony merely presents a question
already appropriately resolved by the jury below. No new trial was needed.
¶8.
THE JUDGMENT OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COAHOMA COUNTY OF
CONVICTION OF COUNT I SALE OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE AND SENTENCE
OF SIX YEARS; COUNT II POSSESSION OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE AND
SENTENCE OF SIX YEARS, ALL IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT
OF CORRECTIONS; AND COUNT III MISDEMEANOR POSSESSION OF A
CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE AND FINE OF $250 IS AFFIRMED. SENTENCE IN COUNT
II SHALL RUN CONCURRENTLY TO SENTENCE IN COUNT I AND CONSECUTIVELY
3
TO ANY AND ALL SENTENCES PREVIOUSLY IMPOSED. ALL COSTS OF THIS APPEAL
ARE ASSESSED TO THE APPELLANT.
McMILLIN, C.J., KING, P.J., BRIDGES, THOMAS, LEE, 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.
