Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Taylor v. Galloway

Court of Appeals of Mississippi

Decided December 11, 2012No. 2011-CA-01378-COAPublished

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partRussell, J.

¶ 37. I would find that the county court erred in excluding a statement made by Taylor’s father on the basis of hearsay, because the statement was admissible to show Taylor’s state of mind. The declar-ant was also not available. Further, I would find that the error complained of by Taylor was apparent throughout the record under Mississippi Rule of Evidence 103(a)(2); therefore, I disagree with the majority’s conclusion that the matter argued by Taylor on appeal was not preserved for appellate review and respectfully dissent as to that issue. I agree with the majority that the issue of penal…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Cooper v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Moorehead v. HudsonCourt of Appeals of Mississippi · 2004

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API