Mississippi Court of Appeals: Coley Roberts v. State Mississippi Appeal Docketed

• The Mississippi Court of Appeals has docketed an appeal in the case of Coley Djuan Roberts a/k/a Coley Roberts v. State of Mississippi.
• The appellate case is identified by number 2025-CP-00931-COA, with the judgment officially entered on June 26, 2025.
• This appeal originates from a decision made in the Lauderdale County Circuit Court.
• The initial trial proceedings were overseen by the Honorable Robert Thomas Bailey.

The appellate judgment in this matter was rendered on June 26, 2025.

The Mississippi Court of Appeals has formally docketed an appeal concerning the case of Coley Djuan Roberts, also identified as Coley Roberts, against the State of Mississippi. This appellate action, assigned case number 2025-CP-00931-COA, signifies a significant step in the judicial process for the appellant, Coley Djuan Roberts, who is challenging a prior legal determination. The State of Mississippi is listed as the appellee in this proceeding, indicating its role as the party defending the lower court's decision.

The appellate judgment in this matter was rendered on June 26, 2025. This date marks the official entry of the appellate court's decision regarding the issues presented by the appellant. The original proceedings that led to this appeal took place in the Lauderdale County Circuit Court, a trial-level court within the Mississippi judicial system. The initial judgment that is now under review was overseen by the Honorable Robert Thomas Bailey, who presided as the trial judge in the Lauderdale County Circuit Court.

The filing of an appeal with the Mississippi Court of Appeals, as seen in the Coley Djuan Roberts v. State of Mississippi case, represents a fundamental aspect of the state's judicial structure. This court serves as an intermediate appellate body, primarily tasked with reviewing decisions made by circuit and chancery courts across Mississippi. Its role is to ensure that legal standards were properly applied, and that due process was observed during the initial trial proceedings.

When a case like Coley Roberts v. State Mississippi reaches this level, it means that one of the parties believes an error of law or procedure occurred at the trial court level that warrants reconsideration. The Mississippi Court of Appeals 2025-CP-00931-COA will now examine the record from the Lauderdale County Circuit Court appeal, including transcripts and legal arguments, to determine if the judgment rendered by Judge Robert Thomas Bailey Mississippi should be affirmed, reversed, or remanded for further action. This meticulous review is crucial for upholding the integrity and consistency of legal interpretations throughout the state.

The appellate process, exemplified by the Coley Djuan Roberts v. State of Mississippi case, is a cornerstone of the American legal system, providing a critical check on the decisions of trial courts. While the specific details of the arguments or the nature of the original conviction from the Lauderdale County Circuit Court are not publicly detailed in the initial filing, the very existence of this appeal underscores the right of individuals to seek higher judicial review. This mechanism ensures that no single court's decision is final without the possibility of scrutiny by a panel of appellate judges.

Such appellate judgments are vital for maintaining public confidence in the judiciary and for the consistent application of law. The Mississippi appellate judgment in this instance, dated June 26, 2025, will contribute to the body of legal precedent within the state, even if the specific outcome is not yet known. It reinforces the principle that all legal proceedings, including those presided over by Judge Robert Thomas Bailey Mississippi, are subject to a thorough and impartial review to safeguard justice.

The provided text is limited to case identification details (parties, court, judge, date) and does not contain the judgment's substance or reasoning. Therefore, no practical implication for lawyers or compliance officers can be derived from this information alone.

Source: Original reporting via court document