The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down four opinions today and three of them are at least a partial reversal. The lone affirmance was in an MTCA wrongful-death case stemming from a drowning. A PCR decision was affirmed in part and reversed in part, a post-divorce property division decision was reversed, and a police officer’s conviction of culpable-negligence manslaughter was reversed.
Malone v. State, 2022-CA-00281-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming in part and remanding in part the circuit court’s ruling in a PCR matter, holding that the circuit court did not err in rejecting the newly discovered evidence claim but holding that the circuit court erred by not addressing the ineffective assistance of counsel claim with specific findings or conclusions related to that claim.
(9-1-0: Westbrooks concurred in result only without writing)
Stephens v. City of Gulfport, 2022-CA-01008-COA (Civil – Wrongful Death)
Affirming summary judgment in favor of the city on an MTCA case stemming from a drowning, holding that Mississippi law does not “impose a duty on governmental entities to protect or warn against alleged dangerous conditions on property adjacent to property owned or operated by that governmental entity and not caused by the governmental entity” and that, in any event, the MTCA’s open and obvious defense applied to the river and barred the claim.
(9-1-0: Westbrooks concurred in result only without separate written opinion)
Thompson v. Thompson, 2022-CA-01014-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Reversing the chancellor’s property division ruling, holding that the judgment was a final, appealable order and that the chancellor erred in failing to conduct a proper Ferguson analysis.
(10-0)
Fox v. State, 2022-KA-00988-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Reversing conviction of a police officer for culpable-negligence manslaughter against, holding that “[b]ased on the credible evidence presented at trial, no evidence establishes that Fox acted in a grossly negligent manner or that the victim’s death from minor abrasions was reasonably foreseeable under the circumstances,” that the verdict was against the overwhelming weight of the evidence (though this holding was relegated to a footnote) and holding that the circuit court abused its discretion by failing to give an accident or misfortune jury instruction.
(5-1-4: Wilson concurred in part and in the result without writing; Emfinger dissented, joined by Westbrooks, McDonald, and McCarty)
Other Orders
None
Mississippi Appeals Blog 