Demetrius Tisdale v. State of Mississippi
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
NO. 2008-KA-00098-COA
DEMETRIUS TISDALE
APPELLANT
v.
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
DATE OF JUDGMENT:
TRIAL JUDGE:
COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED:
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT:
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE:
DISTRICT ATTORNEY:
NATURE OF THE CASE:
TRIAL COURT DISPOSITION:
DISPOSITION:
MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED:
MANDATE ISSUED:
APPELLEE
11/13/2007
HON. MARCUS D. GORDON
NESHOBA COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
EDMUND J. PHILLIPS
CHRISTOPHER A. COLLINS
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
BY: LADONNA C. HOLLAND
MARK SHELDON DUNCAN
CRIMINAL - FELONY
CONVICTED OF SALE OF MARIJUANA
AND SENTENCED TO TWO AND ONEHALF YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE
MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS
AFFIRMED: 1/27/2009
BEFORE MYERS, P.J., ISHEE AND CARLTON, JJ.
MYERS, P.J., FOR THE COURT:
¶1.
Demetrius Tisdale appeals his conviction in the Circuit Court of Neshoba County of
sale less than 30 grams of marijuana and sentence of two and one-half years in the custody
of the Mississippi Department of Corrections. Tisdale argues that the jury’s verdict was
against the overwhelming weight of the evidence. Finding no error, we affirm.
FACTS
¶2.
On April 11, 2006, Officer Neal Higgason set up a pre-buy meeting with a
confidential informant, Bobby Stanley (Bobby), for the purpose of “making a buy” in
Philadelphia, Mississippi. Officer Higgason, with another officer witnessing, searched
Bobby, his wife, Nicolette Stanley (Nicolette), and the Stanleys’ vehicle. Officer Higgason
then provided Bobby with $20 to make the buy and outfitted him with a concealed wire and
camera.
¶3.
At trial, the State produced testimony that Bobby then telephoned someone he called
“Mete” to set up a purchase of marijuana. Officer Higgason testified that he kept a visual
on the Stanleys during the buy and personally witnessed Tisdale pick up Bobby from the buy
location, drive around the block, and return him to the same location. Officer Higgason then
recovered what was later determined to be 2.1 grams of marijuana from Bobby.
WHETHER THE VERDICT WAS AGAINST THE OVERWHELMING
WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE.
¶4.
In Bush v. State, 895 So. 2d 836, 844 (¶18) (Miss. 2005), the supreme court discussed
appellate review of the weight of the evidence supporting a jury’s verdict:
When reviewing a denial of a motion for a new trial based on an objection to
the weight of the evidence, we will only disturb a verdict when it is so
contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence that to allow it to stand
would sanction an unconscionable injustice. . . . However, the evidence should
be weighed in the light most favorable to the verdict. A reversal on the
grounds that the verdict was against the overwhelming weight of the evidence,
unlike a reversal based on insufficient evidence, does not mean that acquittal
was the only proper verdict. Rather, as the "thirteenth juror," the court simply
disagrees with the jury's resolution of the conflicting testimony. This
2
difference of opinion does not signify acquittal any more than a disagreement
among the jurors themselves. Instead, the proper remedy is to grant a new
trial.
(Citations and internal quotations omitted).
¶5.
Tisdale, who did not testify at trial and produced no witnesses in his defense, does not
cite to any conflicting testimony. Rather, he argues on appeal that the officers failed to
thoroughly search the Stanleys prior to the buy and that the couple may have had the drugs
in their possession prior to the sale. The Stanleys, he argues, had a motive to lie because
they had outstanding fines and would not have been paid unless a sale was completed.
Tisdale also elicited admissions from Bobby that he had used marijuana in the past and had
a criminal record that included petit larceny.
¶6.
Officer Higgason testified that he searched the Stanleys and their vehicle and did not
find any drugs, paraphernalia, or money. Although he conceded on cross-examination that
he did not perform an invasive search of Nicolette’s person or search her or her husband’s
undergarments, he explained on redirect that he had followed departmental procedures and
that he was satisfied with the search. Officer Higgason also testified that he followed the
Stanleys to the buy location, witnessed Bobby enter Tisdale’s vehicle, followed it “around
the block,” and identified Tisdale as the driver. Bobby testified that he purchased the
marijuana from Tisdale and that neither he nor his wife was in possession of drugs prior to
the purchase. The testimony of both witnesses was corroborated by the surveillance
videotape.
3
¶7.
On our review of the record, viewing the above evidence in a light most favorable to
the verdict, we find that the jury’s verdict was not so contrary to the overwhelming weight
of the evidence that to allow it to stand would sanction an unconscionable injustice.
¶8.
THE JUDGMENT OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF NESHOBA COUNTY OF
CONVICTION OF SALE OF MARIJUANA AND SENTENCE OF TWO AND ONEHALF YEARS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS IS AFFIRMED. ALL COSTS OF THIS APPEAL ARE ASSESSED
TO NESHOBA COUNTY.
KING, C.J., LEE, P.J., IRVING, GRIFFIS, BARNES, ISHEE, ROBERTS AND
CARLTON, 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.
