Carla hughes12/8/2023 Pittman testified that Banks had been unaware of his relationship with Hughes. They became friends and began a sexual relationship. Pittman met Hughes in August 2006 at Chastain Middle School, where they both were teachers. Pittman and Banks lived together in Ridgeland, Mississippi. Hughes had been having an affair with Keyon Pittman, Banks s fiancé. Hughes was convicted of two counts of capital murder for the murder of Avis Banks and her unborn son. Finding no error, we affirm the judgment of the Circuit Court of Madison County. Whether the trial court erred by admitting DNA evidence from a pair of TredSafe shoes. Whether the trial court erred in overruling Hughes s motion for a directed verdict. Whether the trial court erred by denying the motion to suppress the evidence found in Hughes s house. Whether the trial court erred during jury selection when it denied one of Hughes s peremptory challenges. Whether the verdicts are against the overwhelming weight of the evidence. Whether the jury committed misconduct by submitting a note to the judge during deliberations asking whether the State could have called Hughes to the stand. The jury declined to impose the death penalty, and the Circuit Court of Madison County imposed two sentences of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole, with both sentences to run concurrently. ![]() A Madison County jury convicted Carla Hughes of two counts of capital murder. WOOD MICHAEL GUEST CRIMINAL - FELONY AFFIRMED - BEFORE WALLER, C.J., RANDOLPH AND CHANDLER, JJ. ![]() OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: STEPHANIE B. CHAPMAN, III MADISON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT BRANDON I. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI DATE OF JUDGMENT: TRIAL JUDGE: COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: DISTRICT ATTORNEY: NATURE OF THE CASE: DISPOSITION: MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED: MANDATE ISSUED: HON. Finding no error, the Supreme Court affirmed the circuit court's judgment. Hughes raised six issues on appeal: (1) whether the jury committed misconduct by submitting a note to the judge during deliberations asking whether the State could have called Hughes to the stand (2) whether the verdicts were against the overwhelming weight of the evidence (3) whether the trial court erred during jury selection when it denied one of Hughes's peremptory challenges (4) whether the trial court erred in overruling Hughes's motion for a directed verdict (5) whether the trial court erred by denying the motion to suppress the evidence found in Hughes's house and (6) whether the trial court erred in admitting DNA evidence from a pair of shoes.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |