We did not get any opinions from the Mississippi Supreme Court today. I am working under concurrent briefing deadlines so I am not going to try to compensate for the lack of opinions with a creative writing project this time around.
Other Orders
Batiste v. State, 2019-CA-00283-SCT (denying rehearing)
Berryman v. State, 2020-CT-00710-SCT (denying pro se cert petition and cert petition filed by the Office of State Public Defender – Indigent Appeals Division)
Last week, I noted that Justice Maxwell’s special concurrence in Jones v. Alcorn State University, 2020-CA-01238-SCT had garnered votes from four other justices. David Calder was kind enough to point to me to several cases on the topic including this one:
Presiding Justice Dickinson issued a specially concurring opinion in McDonald [v. McDonald, 39 So. 3d 868 (Miss. 2010)] tailored to the issue of guardian ad litem testimony and hearsay. Id. at 887 (¶ 65) (Dickinson, P.J., specially concurring). His concurrence was joined by four other justices, giving the opinion precedential value. See Sweatt v. Murphy, 733 So. 2d 207, 209-210 (¶ 7) (Miss. 1999) (noting that when at least four justices vote in favor of another justice’s concurring opinion, the concurrence has “precedential value”).
Ballard v. Ballard, 255 So. 3d 126, 133 (Miss. 2017) (emphasis added).
Mississippi Appeals Blog 
2 thoughts on “May 19, 2022: A quiet day at the Mississippi Supreme Court”