Daniel Clyde Knight, Jr. v. City of Aberdeen
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
NO. 2003-KM-01603-COA
DANIEL CLYDE KNIGHT, JR. A/K/A
DANIEL C. KNIGHT, JR. A/K/A DANNY KNIGHT
v.
CITY OF ABERDEEN
DATE OF TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT:
TRIAL JUDGE:
COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED:
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT:
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE:
NATURE OF THE CASE:
TRIAL COURT DISPOSITION:
DISPOSITION:
MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED:
CERTIORARI FILED:
MANDATE ISSUED:
APPELLANT
APPELLEE
6/16/2003
HON. THOMAS J. GARDNER, III
MONROE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
MOSE LEE SUDDUTH
ROBERT H. FAULKS
CRIMINAL - MISDEMEANOR
CONVICTION OF DUI, FIRST OFFENSE:
SENTENCED TO TWO DAYS'
INCARCERATION IN THE MONROE COUNTY
JAIL AND PAYMENT OF $1,000 FINE AND
COURT COSTS. SENTENCE IS SUSPENDED
AND APPELLANT PLACED ON UNSUPERVISED PROBATION FOR 180 DAYS AND
REQUIRED TO ATTEND AN ALCOHOL
SAFETY EDUCATION PROGRAM .
AFFIRMED-09/07/2004
EN BANC.
IRVING, J., FOR THE COURT:
¶1.
The Municipal Court of the City of Aberdeen found Danny Knight guilty of driving under the
influence, first offense. Knight appealed the conviction to the Circuit Court of Monroe County where he
was also found guilty in a non-jury trial. The circuit judge sentenced Knight to two days' incarceration in
the Monroe County jail, with such sentence suspended, upon condition that Knight not violate any laws or
statutes of the State of Mississippi. The circuit judge also sentenced Knight to 180 days of unsupervised
probation and fined him $1,000, plus costs and assessments. Additionally, Knight was ordered to attend
and complete an alcohol safety education program.
¶2.
Feeling aggrieved by this conviction and sentence, Knight filed this appeal wherein he challenges
the sufficiency of the evidence undergirding his conviction.
¶3.
We find the evidence sufficient to support Knight's conviction. Consequently, we affirm his
conviction as well as his sentence.
FACTS
¶4.
On the evening of July 5, 2001, James Huffman, was traveling north on Highway 45 toward
Aberdeen. While in route, he encountered a red Chevy pickup truck, also traveling north. As he followed
behind the truck, Huffman noticed that the truck was weaving periodically across the centerline of the
highway. Huffman attempted to pass the truck, but the truck continued to veer closely to the centerline of
the highway. Consequently, Huffman abandoned his efforts to overtake the truck. Huffman then called
911 and reported the truck and its tag number.
¶5.
Soon after Huffman’s call to 911, the Aberdeen Police Department's dispatcher was notified that
a caller had reported that a red pickup truck, which was coming into Aberdeen from Highway 45, needed
to be checked out because it was swerving on the highway. Officer Robert Russell, a patrolman for the
Aberdeen Police Department, departed the station to look for the red pickup truck with the specific tag
number that the dispatcher had provided.
¶6.
Officer Russell first observed, on Highway 45 South in the area of Chestnut Street, a pickup truck
matching the description given by the dispatcher. Officer Russell followed the pickup truck and observed
2
the truck make a wide right turn onto Meridian Street. The pickup then ran off the right side of the road,
moved back onto the road and across the centerline of the street.
¶7.
After seeing the truck make these series of maneuvers, Officer Russell activated his blue lights and
proceeded to stop the vehicle on Chestnut Street just off South Meridian Street. After the truck came to
a stop, Officer Russell went to the window on the driver’s side. He immediately smelled a strong odor of
alcohol emanating from that window. When Officer Russell asked the driver for the driver's license and
proof of insurance, the driver of the vehicle just looked at Officer Russell, although he later gave his license
to Officer Russell. The driver was identified as Danny Knight. He did not have any proof of insurance with
him at the time of the stop.
¶8.
When Officer Russell inquired whether Knight had had anything to drink, Knight responded that
he had drunk a six pack of beer since leaving work at 5:00 p.m. and had drunk his last beer about twenty
minutes prior to his being stopped by the officer. Officer Russell asked Knight to exit the truck. As Knight
complied, Officer Russell smelled a strong aroma of alcohol gushing from Knight’s truck. Also, as Knight
exited the truck, he stumbled slightly and grabbed the bed of the truck to stabilize himself. Officer Russell
administered a portable Intoxilyzer test to Knight. The test was positive for alcohol consumption. Knight
was arrested and transported to the Aberdeen Police Department. While at the station, Knight refused on
two occasions to give a breath sample for analysis by an Intoxilyzer machine.
¶9.
Knight was charged with driving under the influence, first offense and, as previously noted, was
first convicted of the charge in the Municipal Court of Aberdeen. He was also convicted in a de nova
bench trial by the Circuit Court of Monroe County, leading to this appeal.
ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF THE ISSUE
3
¶10.
Knight argues that the Circuit Court of Monroe County should have dismissed the DUI charge
against him because the City of Aberdeen failed to prove the charge beyond a reasonable doubt.
¶11.
In challenges to the sufficiency of evidence, the standard of review requires that the evidence be
considered in the light most favorable to the City and that all credible evidence consistent with Knight's guilt
be accepted as true. McRee v. State, 732 So. 2d 246, 249 (¶9) (Miss. 1999). In reviewing a claim of
insufficient evidence, an appellate court must review all of the evidence in the light most consistent with the
lower court’s ruling. See Smith v. State, 802 So. 2d 82, 85 (¶10) (Miss. 2001). The prosecution is given
the benefit of all favorable inferences that may be reasonably drawn from the evidence. Id. "If the facts
and inferences so considered point in favor of the accused with sufficient force that reasonable men could
not have found beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty, reversal and discharge are required."
Mangum v. State, 762 So. 2d 337, 341 (¶11) (Miss. 2000).
¶12.
Knight cites Richbourg v. State, 744 So. 2d 352 (Miss. Ct. App. 1999), for his argument that the
evidence was insufficient to support the conviction. However, the case is clearly distinguishable.
¶13.
In Richbourg, the defendant was making a trip from Kansas City, Missouri to Panama City,
Florida and had an accident, in Monroe County, Mississippi, with another vehicle. Id. at 353-54 (¶2).
Several hours before the accident, the defendant had stopped in St. Louis for lunch and had one beer.
Id. at 354 (¶3). A highway patrol officer arrived at the scene of the accident and observed some ruptured
cans of beer in the trunk of the defendant’s vehicle and smelled alcohol on the person of the defendant.1
Id. Based on these perceptions, the patrol officer conducted a horizontal gauge nystagmus (HGN) test on
the defendant, and thereafter, based on the results of the HGN test, asked the defendant to blow into the
1
The impact of the two vehicles apparently caused a forty-five pound dumbbell, which the
defendant kept in the trunk, to rupture the cans of beer.
4
officer's portable alcosensor. Id. at (¶4). The defendant refused to comply. As a result of his refusal to
comply, the defendant was transported to the county jail. Id. At the jail, the defendant refused to submit
to an Intoxilyzer test. As a result, he was charged with driving under the influence and was convicted in
two inferior courts. Id.
¶14.
On appeal, we reversed and rendered the lower courts’ decisions. Id. at 357 (¶16). We pointed
out that the arresting officer admitted that he did not witness the defendant driving the vehicle, that the smell
of alcohol in and of itself did not indicate how much alcohol the defendant had consumed, that the officer
did not administer any tests to the defendant, other than the HGN test, to determine intoxication, and that
the officer did not observe the defendant stumble or stagger around. We also noted that the officer did not
observe any slurring of speech by the defendant and that the defendant was not argumentative with the
officer. Id. at 356 (¶10).
¶15.
Unlike Richbourg, there was strong evidence in this case that Knight was driving under the
influence of alcohol. We see no need to recount the facts here. It is sufficient to say that, based on the
facts as recited earlier in this opinion, the circuit judge was justified in finding Knight guilty as charged.
Therefore, we find no merit in Knight’s contention that the evidence was insufficient to support his
conviction of driving under the influence, first offense.
¶16. THE JUDGMENT OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF MONROE COUNTY OF
CONVICTION OF DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE, FIRST OFFENSE, AND
SENTENCE OF TWO DAYS' INCARCERATION IN THE MONROE COUNTY JAIL, WITH
SENTENCE SUSPENDED, PAYMENT OF $1,000 FINE AND 180 DAYS OF UNSUPERVISED
PROBATION, IS AFFIRMED. ALL COSTS OF THIS APPEAL ARE ASSESSED TO THE
APPELLANT.
KING, C.J., BRIDGES AND LEE, P.JJ., MYERS, CHANDLER, GRIFFIS AND
BARNES, 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.
