Court: Court of Appeals of Mississippi; September 19, 2000; Mississippi; State Appellate Court
Betty Jo Craig was convicted in DeSoto County Circuit Court of two counts of obtaining a controlled substance by fraud, receiving a consecutive six-year prison sentence for each count. She appealed, claiming the verdicts were against the overwhelming weight of the evidence and that her trial counsel was ineffective. The court affirmed the judgment, finding no error.
On January 14, 1997, James Randall Crase, a long-time friend of Craig, offered her transportation to a drugstore, unaware that he was acting as a confidential informant for law enforcement. Under the direction of Agent Stanford of the DeSoto County Metro Narcotics Unit, Crase took Craig to Kroger Pharmacy and Walgreen's. At Kroger, pharmacist Mike McKnatt described filling a prescription for Vicodin ES based on a description provided by law enforcement, although he could not definitively identify Craig. At Walgreen's, pharmacist Samuel Estes filled a prescription for Mepergan Fortis, also unable to identify Craig.
Following their visit to Walgreen's, agents stopped Crase's vehicle and discovered a prescription sack in the back seat. Upon arresting Craig, a search revealed Mepergan Fortis concealed in her bra. Loretta Prince, an employee of Dr. Futrell, testified that the signatures on the prescriptions were not authentic and that no patients by the names on the prescriptions existed in the doctor's records. Craig did not testify or present evidence in her defense.
The jury found Craig guilty on both counts. In her appeal, Craig argued insufficient evidence to support the convictions but conflated the concepts of "weight" and "sufficiency" of evidence. The court explained that it reviews evidence favorably toward the verdict and will not overturn the jury's decision unless no reasonable juror could find her guilty.
To determine if a jury verdict is against the overwhelming weight of the evidence, the trial court must view all evidence in favor of the verdict. In cases of conflicting evidence, the court assumes the jury resolved conflicts in a manner consistent with the verdict. A new trial must be granted if sustaining the verdict would lead to manifest injustice; otherwise, the motion should be denied. Craig argues that the evidence did not credibly identify her as participating in a crime. The jury is responsible for evaluating conflicting evidence and the credibility of witnesses, including assessing inconsistencies in testimony. The evidence presented, including testimony from a pharmacist and police officers identifying Craig's presence at pharmacies and possession of drugs, was deemed sufficient to support the verdict, despite the lack of positive identification from the pharmacists.
Craig also claims ineffective assistance of counsel, citing Strickland v. Washington's two-part test, which requires demonstrating both deficient performance by counsel and resulting prejudice to the defense. Craig contends her attorney should have called Sergeant McClain as a witness and moved for a mistrial when she was seen in handcuffs. Testimony indicated that a sack containing pharmacy items was found on her during a custodial search. The burden lies with Craig to show both prongs of the Strickland test are met, with a presumption that attorney performance falls within reasonable professional standards and that trial decisions are strategic.
The Strickland test evaluates an attorney's performance with deference, assessing whether their actions were both deficient and prejudicial based on the totality of circumstances. The overall performance is considered, including strategic decisions related to filing motions, calling witnesses, and making objections. In this case, there was no evidence that Sergeant McClain would have contradicted Belinda Dean's testimony if called, nor was there any indication that Craig was brought into the courtroom handcuffed in the jury's presence. Craig did not provide a compelling argument that her counsel was constitutionally ineffective. Therefore, the circuit court's judgment of conviction for two counts of obtaining a controlled substance by fraud, with a six-year sentence on each count to run consecutively, is affirmed. All appeal costs are assigned to DeSoto County. The judgment was upheld with a dissent from Irving, J., without a separate opinion.
