J. B. Price, Jr. v. State of Mississippi
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
NO. 2001-KA-01629-COA
J.B. PRICE, JR.
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
4/4/2000
HON. JANNIE M. LEWIS
YAZOO COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
GODFREY RONALD TILLMAN
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
BY: SCOTT STUART
JAMES H. POWELL, III
CRIMINAL - FELONY
RAPE: TO SERVE A SENTENCE OF TEN YEARS
IN THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS
AFFIRMED: 6/03/2003
BEFORE KING, P.J., MYERS AND GRIFFIS, JJ.
KING, P.J., FOR THE COURT:
¶1.
J. B. Price was convicted of rape in the Yazoo County Circuit Court. When the jury was unable
to agree on a sentence, the court sentenced Price to ten years in the custody of the Mississippi Department
of Corrections. Price has appealed and raised the following issues:
I. Whether the jury verdict is against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
II. Whether the trial court erred in denying Price's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, or in
the alternative, a new trial.
FACTS
¶2.
On May 19, 1999, at approximately 12:30 a.m., T. Davis 1 heard a knock on her door. Davis
found Price at her door. Price, who lived across the street with his mother, stated that his car had broken
down and he needed to use the telephone. Davis testified that Price used the telephone and then asked
to use the bathroom.
¶3.
After Price came out of the bathroom, he sat down in a chair. According to Davis, he then got up,
walked over to her, put one hand at her neck, the other hand over her mouth, and took her outside through
the back door. Price told Davis to lie down, which she did. Davis indicated that she wanted to scream
at that time but did not. Price then proceeded to engage in nonconsensual intercourse with Davis.
¶4.
According to Davis, Price took her to several places behind the house to have intercourse. At the
last location, Davis stated that Price inquired, "Do you want me to turn myself in?" Davis testified that
because she was scared, she responded by telling him no. Davis stated that she did not want to have
intercourse with Price but was forced to do so. Davis indicated that at some point she actively resisted
Price.
¶5.
When Price departed, Davis called 911. Ed Warren, the Chief of Police in Bentonia, responded
to the call. Officer Warren testified that when he arrived, Davis appeared disoriented, "she was shaking,
she was muddy, she was scratched up, and seemed like she had been abused pretty good." Officer
Warren took photographs of the area where Davis had indicated that Price had taken her. Davis was then
taken to the hospital where a rape kit was performed, and taken to the Mississippi Crime Lab in Jackson.
1
Due to the nature of the offense, the victim's real name is not being used for purposes of this
opinion.
2
¶6.
According to Officer Warren, when he went across the street to talk to Price, who "came out the
door, stepped out the door. And just without me talking to him or anything, he just turned around and put
his hands behind his back and I cuffed him and we went to the town hall and took some pictures." Warren
indicated that Price appeared to have had "grass looped in his shoelaces. He had muddy pants on his
knees and his body temperature was very hot, like a lot of exercise or whatever, but he was real hot."
¶7.
At trial on April 4, 2000, a jury convicted Price of rape.
ISSUES AND ANALYSIS
I.
Whether the jury verdict is against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
¶8.
Price contends that the verdict is against the overwhelming weight of the evidence. He claims that
Davis' testimony "was in many respects improbable and unreasonable." Price asserts that the testimony
given by Davis alleging that she "had little or no relationship" with him was unbelievable. He asserts that
this testimony was refuted by his mother who stated that Davis constantly called her house to speak with
Price. Price further alleges that Davis' testimony was contradictory when she testified to having
continuously kicked him, because there are no bruises or marks to show her resistance.
¶9.
Price contends that "a great disparity exists between the testimony of [Davis] and the statement
given immediately after the incident." Price indicates that Davis' statement reflects that they had intercourse
one time, but that her testimony states that there were three encounters. Price claims that Davis never
mentioned in her statement that she was scared but did in fact testify that she was scared.
¶10.
Price relies on Joslin v. State, 129 Miss. 181, 91 So. 903 (1922), where a rape conviction was
reversed because the testimony was in many respects so improbable and unreasonable that the verdict was
against the clear weight of the evidence.
3
¶11.
In determining whether a jury verdict is against the overwhelming weight of the evidence, this Court
adheres to the following standard:
The standard of review for the determination of whether a jury verdict is against the
overwhelming weight of the evidence is that this Court must "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." A new trial will not be ordered unless
the verdict is so contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence that to allow it to
stand would sanction "unconscionable injustice."
Crawford v. State, 754 So. 2d 1211 (¶30) (Miss. 2000) (citations omitted).
¶12.
In this case, Davis testified that Price put his penis in her vagina, that she did not want to have sex
with him, and that he forced her to do so. It is well settled that in such a case of conflicting testimony, each
distinct view is absorbed into the minds of the jury as the finders of fact, and it is within the province of the
jury to determine the credibility among several witnesses. Hughes v. State, 724 So. 2d 893 (¶18) (Miss.
1998). Our case law clearly holds that the unsupported word of the victim of a sex crime is sufficient to
support a guilty verdict where that testimony is not discredited or contradicted by other credible evidence,
especially if the conduct of the victim is consistent with the conduct of one who has been victimized by a
sex crime. Crawford v. State, 754 So. 2d 1211, (¶31) (Miss. 2000).
¶13.
We find that the record contained sufficient credible evidence upon which the jury could find that
Price violated Miss. Code Ann. Section 97-3-65(3)(a) (Supp. 1999).2
II.
2
Miss. Code Ann. Section 97-3-65(3)(a) (Supp. 1999) provides: (3)(a) Every person who shall
have forcible sexual intercourse with any person, or who shall have sexual intercourse not constituting
forcible sexual intercourse or statutory rape with any person without that person's consent by administering
to such person any substance or liquid which shall produce such stupor or such imbecility of mind or
weakness of body as to prevent effectual resistance, upon conviction, shall be imprisoned for life in the
State Penitentiary if the jury by its verdict so prescribes; and in cases where the jury fails to fix the penalty
at life imprisonment, the court shall fix the penalty at imprisonment in the State Penitentiary for any term as
the court, in its discretion, may determine.
4
Whether the trial court erred in denying Price's motion for judgment notwithstanding the
verdict, or in the alternative, a new trial.
¶14.
Price contends that the trial court erred by denying his motion for judgment notwithstanding the
verdict, or new trial. He claims that Davis' testimony was improbable and unbelievable. He further claims
that "[a] credible witness, Ms. Gertrude Wilkerson refuted Ms. [Davis'] contentions, of a casual relationship
with J. B. Price."
¶15.
This Court must review the denial of a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict in the
following manner:
This Court's standards of review regarding a denial of a judgment notwithstanding the
verdict and a peremptory instruction are the same. Our standards of review for a denial of
a judgment notwithstanding the verdict and a directed verdict are also identical. Under this
standard, this Court will consider the evidence in the light most favorable to the appellee,
giving that party the benefit of all favorable inference that may be reasonably drawn from
the evidence. If the facts so considered point so overwhelmingly in favor of the appellant
that reasonable men could not have arrived at a contrary verdict, we are required to
reverse and render. On the other hand if there is substantial evidence in support of the
verdict, that is, evidence of such quality and weight that reasonable and fair minded jurors
in the exercise of impartial judgment might have reached different conclusions, affirmance
is required. The above standards of review, however, are predicated on the fact that the
trial judge applied the correct law.
Jackson v. State, 815 So. 2d 1196 (¶14) (Miss. 2002).
¶16.
In this case, Davis testified that Price forced her to have sexual intercourse and that she did not
want to do so. The jury sits as trier of fact, and is charged with resolving the conflicts in evidence. Hughes,
724 So. 2d at (¶18). The jury resolved the conflict in favor of Davis. There existed within the record
substantive credible evidence to support that finding. Therefore, we affirm the trial court's decision.
¶17. THE JUDGMENT OF THE YAZOO COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT OF CONVICTION
OF RAPE AND SENTENCE OF TEN YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS IS AFFIRMED. ALL COSTS OF THIS APPEAL ARE
ASSESSED TO YAZOO COUNTY.
5
McMILLIN, C.J., SOUTHWICK, P.J., BRIDGES, THOMAS, LEE, IRVING, MYERS,
CHANDLER AND GRIFFIS, JJ., CONCUR.
6
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.
