Davis v. State

The jury did not need an expert to help them understand the significance of a report showing that none of the defendants' fingerprints were found in the getaway car.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Jermaine Edward Davis, along with co-defendants Moody and Anderson, was tried before a jury and found guilty of two counts of armed robbery and one count of possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony. In seven enumerations of error, he i challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, and complains of ii the joint trial with his co-defendants, iii the denial of his motion in limine, iv an instruction on a prior inconsistent statement as substantive evidence, v the denial of a continuance to evaluate exculpatory evidence revealed only in mid-trial, and vi the refusal to grant funds to hire an expert witness. Davis further excepts to the failure to give his requested instruction on “knowledge.” We affirm.

Viewed in the light most favorable to the jury’s verdicts, the evidence revealed that Lawrence Price operated a mobile catering business, selling sandwiches and refreshments to workers at construction sites. Around 4:00 p.m. on December 22, 1995, Price and his granddaughter, Sherry Chaffin, arrived at the parking lot of a construction business to cash payroll checks and collect from people to whom Price had extended credit. In bank money bags, Price had more than $17,000 in cash. Before any employees came out to the parking lot, three men approached and one spoke to Price. As Price turned around, he saw that one of the three carried a sawed-off shotgun. The gunman said, “just give me the money.” Price was struck on the right ear from behind and fell back. Sherry Chaffin screamed as the gunman took $50 from her hand. As the gunman ran toward a yellow car with a black top, Price drew his nine millimeter automatic weapon and fired, hitting the vehicle several times. Price identified the getaway car as that depicted in State’s Exhibits 1, 2, and 3.

Davis v. State

The jury did not need an expert to help them understand the significance of a report showing that none of the defendants' fingerprints were found in the getaway car.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report