The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down six opinions today (eight, if you count each of the three PCR cases that were consolidated). The list starts off PCR heavy, but then we pick up a reverse-Batson/criminal appeal, a personal injury/borrowed servant case, and a defamation case.
Simoneaux v. State, 2022-CP-00532-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming the circuit court’s order dismissing the plaintiff’s third PCR motion, holding that there was no error in finding that the PCR motion was successive and time-barred.
(9-0: McCarty did not participate)
Holliday v. State, 2022-CA-00149-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of PCR motion, holding that the circuit court did not err in denying the petition claiming ineffective assistance of counsel based on the plaintiff’s knowing and voluntary guilty plea.
(9-0: Smith did not participate)
Blackmore v. State, 2021-CA-00743-COA (Civil – PCR)
consolidated with
White v. State, 2021-CA-00744 COA
consolidated with
Traxler v. State, 2021-CA-00769-COA
Affirming denials of motions in three separate cases arguing that the plaintiffs’ classifications as violent offenders was unconstitutional, holding that Tenth Amendment reserved to Mississippi the right to define DUI as a crime of violence and that enactment of section 97-3-2 superseded the holding in Smith v. State, 942 So. 2d 308 (Miss. Ct. App. 2006), expressly overruling Smith.
(9-0: Emfinger did not participate)
Smith v. State, 2021-KA-01003-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming first-degree murder conviction, holding that the trial court did not err in returning four jurors back to the venire after a “reverse-Batson challenge” by the State or in admitting autopsy photos.
(7-3: McCarty concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by Westbrooks and McDonald; Westbrooks and McDonald also concurred in part and dissented in part without separate written opinion)
Dawson v. Burgs, 2021-CA-01038-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming summary judgment in favor of the defendants where the plaintiff was allegedly injured by a coworker, holding the plaintiff (an employee of the defendant temporary staffing agency) was a “borrowed servant” of Dollar General and therefore the alleged tortfeasor (who was an employee of Dollar General) was immune for suit under the MWCA which precluded his direct liability and the staffing agency’s vicarious liability.
(8-2: Westbrooks dissented joined by McDonald)
NOTE – This is a good reminder that substance prevails over form prevail when classifying someone as an “employee” or “independent contractor”:
Fagan v. Faulkner, 2022-CA-00130-COA (Civil – Torts)
Reversing bench trial verdict for the plaintiff in a defamation case, holding that an obscene outburst by a surgeon directed at a nurse were not actionable as slander per se because the evidence did not show the surgeon spoke them in relation to the nurse’s capability to perform her job.
(6-4: McCarty dissented, joined by Carlton, Westbrooks, and McDonald; McDonald also dissented without separate written opinion)
Other Orders
Thomas v. State, 2021-CP-00060-COA (granting motion to recall mandate)
Rhea v. Career General Agency, Inc., 2021-CA-00580-COA (denying rehearing)
Davis v. State, 2021-KA-00759-COA (denying rehearing)
Hull v. State, 2022-CP-00088-COA (recalling mandate and accepting petition for rehearing as timely)
Mississippi Appeals Blog 