Tag: Felony

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of November 21, 2023

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down eight opinions on Tuesday. There are some interesting opinions in there including three opinions with civil procedure issues that civil litigators should take a look at. One deals with the discovery rule and the savings statute after a voluntary dismissal, another deals with a Rule 41 dismissal for want of prosecution, and the other deals with a Rule 56(f) motion in a med mal case.

The Supreme Court will not hand down decisions this week due to the Thanksgiving holiday. Have a Happy Thanksgiving!

Burns v. BancorpSouth Bank, 2022-CA-00404-COA (Civil – Contract)
Affirming dismissal of breach of contract and negligence claims that two banks were liable for not preventing an elderly lady’s caregiver from stealing money from bank accounts, holding that the claims against the banks were barred by the three-year statute of limitations.
(8-1-0: Wilson concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Greenlee did not participate)

Harper v. State, 2022-KA-00659-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of attempted statutory rape and fondling, holding that the trial court did not err by admitting the victim’s out-of-court statements without determining whether the tender-years exception applied because the victim’s teacher’s testimony about what the victim said was not offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted and that the forensic interviewing expert’s testimony did not constitute hearsay, and dismissing the ineffective assistance of counsel claims without prejudice.
(8-2-0: Enfinger concurred in part and in the result without writing and McDonald concurred in the result only without writing)

Agee v. State, 2022-KA-00994-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of aggravated assault, holding that the Court did not err by imposing restitution and that the defendant waived that issue by not objecting during sentencing.
(9-1-0: Westbrooks concurred in the result only without writing)

Clearman v. Pipestone Property Services, LLC, 2022-CA-00651-COA (Civil – Personal injury)
Affirming the circuit court’s dismissal of slip-and-fall claims against a contractor and subcontractor who provided snow and ice removal services for a grocery store on statute of limitations grounds, holding that the “discovery rule” did not apply, the voluntary dismissal of a timely federal court lawsuit against the grocery store did not bring the claims against the contractor and subcontractor within the ambit of the “savings statute,” and the doctrine of equitable tolling did not apply.
(10-0)

Galvan v. State, 2022-KA-00655-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of statutory rape, sexual battery, gratification of lust, and incest, holding that the trial court did not err by not appointing an interpreter or by admitting the defendant’s statements to law enforcement, that the defendant waived objections based on the Confrontation Clause, that there was sufficient evidence to support the incest conviction, and that the defendant failed to prove ineffective assistance of counsel.
(9-1-0: Carlton concurred in result only without writing)

Rawlings v. Rawlings, 2022-CA-00919-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming the chancellor’s denial of the ex-wife’s request for attorney’s fees after denying the ex-husband’s request for alimony modification, holding that she was not entitled to attorney’s fees under the marital dissolution agreement providing that the prevailing party in an enforcement action was entitled to attorney’s fees because this was an action to “modify” the agreement not “enforce” it.
(10-0)

Scott v. UnitedHealthcare of Mississippi, Inc., 2022-CA-00963-COA (Civil – Insurance)
Affirming dismissal for want of prosecution where an 18-month period of inactivity followed the filing of the compliant, interrupted only by some activity prompted by the circuit clerk’s notice of intent to dismiss under Rule 41, that then followed by another 18-month period of inactivity and a second Rule 41 notice, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the case even though the plaintiff filed a “Motion to Leave Case on the Docket” after the second Rule 41 notice and that the Court otherwise had inherent power to dismiss for want of prosecution.
(8-2-0: McDonald and McCarty concurred in part and in the result without writing)

NOTE – The Court was not persuaded by the plaintiff’s efforts to assign blame to the COVID pandemic. The plaintiff argued:

The Court addressed this argument later in the opinion:

Hogan v. Hattiesburg Clinic, P.A., 2022-CA-00650-COA (Civil – Medical Malpractice)
Affirming the circuit court’s denial of the plaintiffs’ 56(f) motion filed the day before the motion for summary judgment hearing, holding that the plaintiffs’ 56(f) motion did not mention the need to obtain additional expert medical opinions and the plaintiffs had not otherwise shown that additional expert opinion could establish proximate cause.
(8-1-0: McCarty concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Carlton did not participate.)

Other Orders

Love v. State, 2021-CP-01101-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of November 16, 2023

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down four opinions today. There is a lengthy personal jurisdiction case, a direct criminal appeal, a circuit vs. chancery jurisdiction dispute, and a death-penalty PCR decision.

K&C Logistics, LLC v. Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc., 2022-CA-00939-SCT (Civil – Other)
Affirming judgment of the circuit court finding no personal jurisdiction in a negligence case stemming from a car wreck in Arizona, holding that the Mississippi Business Corporation Act did not confer personal jurisdiction by virtue of the foreign corporation being registered to do business in Mississippi and that the defendant did not waive the personal jurisdiction defense when its attorneys entered appearances that did not expressly reserve the right to assert the personal jurisdiction defense.
(9-0)

Practice Point – This decision has a lengthy discussion of personal jurisdiction that is worth your time to read. On the waiver issue, the Court clarified persistent confusion over “special appearances” as follows:

Lollis v. State, 2022-KA-00711-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of murder and conspiracy to commit murder, holding that the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict on both counts.
(9-0)

Riverhills Capital Corporation v. At Home Care, Inc., 2022-IA-00568-SCT (Civil – Contract)
Affirming the circuit court’s denial of a motion to transfer a breach of contract, fraud, and quite title claim to chancery court, holding that the plaintiffs had sufficiently pleaded legal claims the circuit court did not err in denying the request to transfer to chancery court even if it is a “close call” and if the legal claims were ultimately found to be without merit.
(9-0)

Note – The Supreme Court said this about circuit court jurisdiction:

Bennett v. State, 2021-CA-01313-SCT (Civil – Death Penalty – PCR)
Affirming the denial of a PCR petition, holding that Cronic did not apply and there was no per se ineffective assistance, that the trial court’s refusal to allow the petitioner to depose two proffered witnesses did not affect the outcome of the trial, and that the petitioner failed to show ineffective assistance of counsel.
(9-0)

Other Orders

Smith v. State, 2021-CT-01003-SCT (granting cert)

Dawson v. Burgs, 2021-CT-01038-SCT (denying cert)

Baker v. State, 2021-CT-01277-SCT (denying cert)

McFarland v. State, 2021-CT-01311-SCT (denying cert)

Fagan v. Faulkner, 2022-CT-00130-SCT (granting cert)

The Mississippi Bar v. Hessler, 2023-BD-00057-SCT (granting emergency motion to clarify opinion to clarify that Hessler is authorized to continue practicing law in Mississippi while his one-year-and-a-day suspension remains in deferred status) *The “motion to clarify” is a handy item to keep in one’s tool belt. It was used here to get a result that had a significant impact on the movant.

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of November 14, 2023

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down seven opinions today. They cover custody, personal injury, felonies, and PCR. One of the personal injury cases stems from an injury sustained during a “TikTok challenge” in a classroom.

Croom v. State, 2022-KA-00598-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of burglary of a dwelling and conspiracy to commit burglary of a dwelling, holding that the trial court did not err by refusing to instruct the jury on the lesser-included offense of trespass and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction of conspiracy.
(9-1-0: Westbrooks concurred in result only without separate written opinion)

Snyder v. Estate of Cockrell, 2022-CA-00597-COA (Civil – Torts)
Affirming summary judgment in a negligence case a man filed against his grandfather’s estate after a child caused the grandfather’s golf cart to run into the plaintiff, holding that in the plaintiff could not prove a breach of duty where there was only speculation about the grandfather’s conduct after he finished operating the golf cart.
(8-2-0: McDonald concurred in part and in result without written opinion; Westbrooks concurred in result only with separate written opinion)

Johnson v. State, 2022-CP-01186-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of PCR motion, holding that the petitioner failed to present evidence other than his bare assertions that his plea was involuntary and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in not granting the petitioner an evidentiary hearing.
(10-0)

Scott v. Le, 2022-CA-00887-COA (Civil – Custody)
Affirming the chancellor’s custody award, holding that the chancellor’s finding that there was a material change in circumstances and the chancellor’s application of the Albright factors to to deny the mother’s request for sole physical custody and grant the father’s request for sole physical custody was supported by substantial evidence.
(10-0)

Taylor v. State, 2022-KA-01042-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of attempted murder and two counts of possession of a controlled substance, holding that evidence of prior arrests did not constitute evidence of prior bad acts under Rule 404(a) because it was offered as the foundation of a witness’s identification of the defendant and that would have been otherwise admissible under the exception in 404(b), that it passed the 403 balancing and, even if it was not admissible, it would have been harmless error.
(9-1-0: Westbrooks concurred in part and in the result without writing)

Brown v. State, 2022-KA-00446-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first-degree murder and shooting into a vehicle, holding that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, that the defendant waived the issue of the judge’s refusal of a second-degree murder instruction when trial counsel did not object and agreed with the judge’s decision, and there was no merit to the claim that a clinical and forensic psychological expert was pressured into proceeding with an independent psychological examination without all of the records he had requested.
(10-0)

Bumpous v. Tishomingo County School District, 2022-CA-01010-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming summary judgment in favor of the school district in a negligent supervision after a student was injured in a class room after falling victim to a “TikTok challenge,” holding that that the injury was not reasonable foreseeable and there was no genuine issue of material fact that would warrant reversal of the summary judgment.
(6-2-2: Westbrooks and McDonald concurred in part and in the result without written opinion; McCarty dissented, joined by Carlton, and joined in part by Westbrooks and McDonald)

Other Orders

Smith v. State, 2026-KA-01946-COA (denying pro se motion to recall mandate and allow untimely motion for rehearing)

Hall v. State, 2022-CP-01097-COA (recalling mandate and allowing appellant’s timely pro se motion for rehearing to proceed on the merits)

McGee v. State, 2023-KA-00083-COA (remanding to the circuit court for forty-five days for a hearing consistent with Mississippi Rule of Appellate Procedure 6(c)(2) and an order)

Patton v. State, 2023-TS-00618-COA (allowing timely appeal to proceed on the Court’s own motion)

Crump v. State, 2023-TS-00795-COA (allowing timely appeal to proceed on the Court’s own motion)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of October 19, 2023

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down three opinions on Thursday. There is an appeal of a life imprisonment sentence, an appeal of a sanction in a workers’ comp case, and an appeal of an order compelling arbitration in a construction contract dispute.

Harris v. State, 2022-KA-01113-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming resentencing to life for depraved heart murder, holding that the sentence to life imprisonment was not mandatory but within the trial court’s discretion under the sentencing guidelines.
(9-0)

Howard Industries, Inc. v. Hayes, 2021-CT-00694-SCT (Civil – Workers’ Comp)
Affirming sanction against the employer’s attorney, holding that there was substantial evidence to support the Commission’s award of sanctions related to the presentation of an expert report that was prepared based on representations the attorney made to the expert.
(5-4: Beam dissented, joined by Coleman, Maxwell, and Chamberlin)

McInnis Electric Company v. Brasfield & Gorrie, LLC, 2021-CA-01115-SCT (Civil – Contract)
Affirming order compelling arbitration in a breach of contract suit filed by a subcontractor against the prime contractor, holding that the parties entered into an arbitration agreement and that the subcontractor’s claims were within the arbitration agreement.
(6-2: Kitchens dissented, joined by King; Randolph did not participate)

NOTE – The underlying dispute between the subcontractor and prime contractor is intertwined with the arrival of COVID-19 in Mississippi. Kitchens’s dissent asserted that the ability to perform a contract during the pandemic was not within the contemplated scope of the arbitration agreement that did not contain a force majeure clause.

Other Orders

Williams v. Mississippi District Council for Assemblies of God, 2021-CA-01007-SCT (rehearing denied)

Everett v. State, 2021-CT-01415-SCT (denying cert)

In Re: Administrative Orders of the Supreme Court of Mississippi, 2023-AD-00001-SCT (directing the disbursement of $137,218.03 in civil legal assistance funds among the MS Center for Legal Services, MS Volunteer Lawyers Project, and North MS Rural Legal Services)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of October 17, 2023

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down three opinions today. There is one divorce case, one direct criminal appeal, and one appeal of the dismissal of a negligence case for the plaintiff’s failure to comply with discovery and discovery-related orders from the circuit court.

Capocaccia v. Capocaccia, 2022-CA-00129-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Reversing the chancellor’s findings on equitable distribution, child support, and college expenses but affirming finding that the father was in contempt, holding that the chancellor erred in the division of the marital estate without referencing or discussion the parties’ debts and assets, erred in awarding child support in excess of the statutory guidelines without specific findings supporting the deviation, and erred in assigning equal responsibility for the children’s college expenses; but that there was no reversible error in denying the father’s motion to continue contempt proceedings or in finding the father in contempt.
(8-2-0: Wilson and McDonald concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion.)

Russell v. State, 2022-KA-00447-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first-degree murder, holding there was no error in allowing a State’s witness to narrate events depicted in a surveillance video while it was played to the jury.
(9-1-0: McDonald concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion.)

McAlpin v. Illinois Central Railroad Company, 2022-CA-00334-COA (Civil – Other)
Affirming the circuit court’s decision granting a motion to dismiss in a negligence suit based on the plaintiff’s failure to heed court-ordered discovery requirements, holding that the trial court did not err in denying the plaintiff’s motion for additional time to comply with the scheduling order that was filed after the court had advised there would be no more extensions and on the date that the court had ordered that additional discovery responses were due and that the trial court did not err in dismissing the case with prejudice for repeated failures to comply with the court’s orders.
(10-0)

PRACTICE POINT – Here is the Court’s analysis of the facts of this case under standard in Beck v. Sapet, 937 So. 2d 945 (Miss. 2006):

Other Orders

Grantham v. Grimm, 2021-CA-01314-COA (denying rehearing)

SDBT Archives LLC v. Penn-Star Insurance Company, 2022-CA-00099-COA (denying rehearing)

Williams v. State, 2022-KA-00100-COA (denying rehearing)

Hamilton v. State, 2022-CP-00217-COA (denying rehearing)

Sanders v. Reeves, 2022-CP-01059-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of October 10, 2023

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down nine opinions today. All but three are direct criminal appeals. Of the six direct criminal appeals, two are reversals. On the non-criminal side of the ledger are an MDES case, a custody decision, and a tangled web of a case stemming from the sale of a log house.

Crutchfield v. State, 2022-KA-00815-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first degree murder and felon in possession of a firearm, holding that the verdict was supported by sufficient evidence and that it was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
(10-0)

Hoffman v. MDES, 2022-CC-00948-COA (Civil – State Boards & Agencies)
Affirming denial of a claim for unemployment benefits based on the COVID-19 pandemic, holding that substantial evidence supported the finding that bank statements alone did not provide sufficient evidence of self-employment income, that the claimant’s right to a fair hearing was not violated, and that the claimant was required to repay an overpayment amount.

(8-1-0: Wilson concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion.)

Jackson v. State, 2022-KA-00009-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Reversing murder conviction, holding that the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction where the State’s case rested entirely on circumstantial evidence of motive and proximity.
(6-1-3: Wilson concurred in part and in the result without written opinion; Westbrooks concurred in part and dissented in part without written opinion; Emfinger dissented, joined by Greenlee)

NOTE – Here is the heart of the Court’s reasoning:

Rodgers v. State, 2022-KA-00179-COA (Civil – Felony)
Affirming conviction of possession of meth but reversing conviction of conspiracy to sell meth, holding that there was insufficient evidence of the conspiracy count because the alleged co-conspirator was not aware of the alleged conspiracy.
(7-1-0: McDonald concurred in part and in result without written opinion; Westbrooks and Emfinger did not participate.)

White v. State, 2022-KA-00607-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction or armed robbery, holding that the trial court did not err in admitting the defendant’s admissions of guilt during his interrogation because the admission was freely and voluntarily made and because the probative value was not substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.
(10-0)

Young v. Niblett, 2022-CA-00294-COA (Civil – Custody)
Affirming the chancellor’s decision modifying custody and awarding sole physical custody to the father, holding that the evidence supported the chancellor’s determination that there was a material change in circumstances and holding that the chancellor’s failure to include a summary of the GAL’s qualifications along with the summary of the GAL’s recommendations was not reversible error.
(10-0)

Britt v. Orrison,  2022-CP-00165-COA (Civil – Other)
Affirming in part and reversing in part the chancery court’s dismissal of a petition for contempt, holding that the Court lacked jurisdiction to consider the issue of the appellant’s request for costs stemming from a prior appeal and that the chancellor did not abuse his discretion in denying a motion to recuse, but that the chancellor erred in dismissing the petition for contempt with respect to the sale of a log house.
(8-1-0: Wilson concurred in result only without written opinion; Lawrence did not participate.)

NOTE – There is a lot of procedural background and litigation background in this opinion that I have not delved into.

Kirkland v. State, 2022-KA-00851-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of nine counts of touching a child for lustful purposes, holding that the circuit court did not err in denying a motion to sever and hold three different trials for each of the three victims and or in finding no discovery violation when the State did not tell the defense that one of the victims had her disclosure date tattooed on her wrist.
(8-1-0: McCarty concurred in part and in the result without written opinion; Smith did not participate.)

Bolton v. State, 2022-KA-01118-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of business burglary, holding that the trial court did not err in denying the defendant’s request for a larceny instruction and that there was no error in denying the motion for new trial because the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
(9-1: McDonald dissented without written opinion.)

Other Orders

Gussio v. Gussio, 2020-CA-00785-COA (denying motion for appellate attorney’s fees)

Manley v. Manley, 2021-CA-00700-COA (denying rehearing)

Knight v. State, 2021-CP-01192-COA (denying rehearing)

Prather v. State, 2021-KA-01416-COA (denying rehearing)

Brown v. State, 2022-CP-00069-COA (denying rehearing)

Brandi’s Hope Community Services, LLC v. Walters, 2022-CA-00188-COA (denying rehearing)

Keller v. State, 2023-TS-00901-COA (granting time to respond to show cause notice)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of September 21, 2023

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down four opinions today. There is an estates case, a domestic relations case, and a direct criminal appeal. However, the main stage act is a decision on the constitutionality of HB 1020 (and part of that decision was unanimous).

In Re The Estate of Herbert Bernard Ivison, Jr.: Malouf & Malouf, PLLC v. The Estate of Herbert Bernard Ivison, Jr., 2022-CA-00837-SCT (Civil – Wills, Trusts & Estates)
Reversing the chancellor’s ruling that a law firm’s probated claim against a state was barred by statute, holding that the law firm had no reason to pursue further additional legal actions to secure payment of its claim after timely probating the claim.
(8-0: Griffis did not participate.)

West v. West, 2020-CA-01206-SCT consolidated with 2022-CA-00147, 2002-IA-01158, 2008-CA-01700, 2009-CA-01877, 2010-CA-00316 (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Reversed on direct appeal and cross appeal, holding that the chancellor erred in his priority-of-liens analysis and remanding for a determination of whether capital stock certificates conspicuously noted bylaws restrictions, holding that the chancellor erred in failing to address a retroactive child support claim, and holding that because one party engaged in claim-splitting the chancellor’s decision in the consolidated case was reversed with orders to dismiss the case and reinstate a 2008 judgment, writs of garnishment, and writs of execution.
(8-0: Beam did not participate.)

NOTE – This is a 44-page opinion with a lot going on. Be advised that my summary is even broader than usual.

Jenkins v. State, 2022-KA-00754-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of DUI (third offense), holding that the trial court did not err in granting a jury instruction that the State was not required to prove that alcohol impaired the defendant’s ability to drive or level of impairment and did not err in refusing the defendant’s instruction on the defendant’s theory of the case where most of the language of that instruction was incorporated into another instruction.
(5-1*-3: Maxwell specially concurred, joined by four justices from the majority: Coleman, Beam, Chamberlin, and Griffis; Kitchens dissented, joined by King.)

NOTE – Justice Maxwell’s concurrence garnered four other votes giving it precedential effect. That special concurrence held that “an instruction like S-8’s potential to confuse weight heavily against giving it in Section (1)(a) common law DUI cases.” The concurrence also noted that even if this instruction was given in error, it would have been harmless due to the overwhelming evidence of guilt.

Here is the text of the instruction at issue:

Saunders v. State, 2023-CA-00584-SCT (Civil – Unconstitutional Statute)
Affirming in part and reversing in part in the HB 1020 case, holding (1) the creation of the CCID inferior court is Section 4 of HB 1020 is constitutional but (2) Section 1’s creation of four “temporary special circuit judges” to be appointed by the Chief Justice to “almost-four-year-terms” violates the Mississippi Constitution’s requirement that circuit judges be elected.
(6-2: Kitchens dissented as to the constitutionality of CCID inferior court, joined by King; Kitchens and King concurred as to the unconstitutionality of appointing the temporary judges; Randolph did not participate)

NOTE – Here is the crux of the reasoning behind the unanimous holding that the appointment process in HB 1020 is unconstitutional:

Other Orders

Moore v. State, 2021-M-00111 (denying application for leave to proceed in the trial court, finding the filing frivolous, and warning that future frivolous filings may result in sanctions)

Hull v. State, 2022-CT-00088-SCT (denying cert)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of September 19, 2023

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down four opinions today. There are two direct criminal appeals (including a reversal on sufficiency-of-the-evidence grounds), an appeal of summary judgment in an MTCA negligence claim, and claim by a constable for wrongful removal.

Love v. State, 2021-KA-01014-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming in part and reversing in part after the defendant was convicted of capital murder, aggravated assault, and armed robbery x3, holding that the trial court did not err in denying motion to sever, in denying motion for mistrial after brief exposure of wrist restraints to the jury venire, or in refusing a Milano instruction; that the indictment for capital murder was legally sufficient and the jury instruction on that count not erroneous; and that the defendant was not placed in double jeopardy, but that the evidence was not legally sufficient to support the armed robbery conviction.
(10-0)

J&A Excavation, Inc. v. City of Ellisville, 2022-CA-00533-COA (Civil – Other) consolidated with J&A Excavation, Inc. v. Jones County, 2022-CA-00547-COA (Civil – Other)
Reversing the circuit court’s decision that affirmed the Board of Aldermen and Board of Supervisors, holding that the decisions were not supported by substantial evidence and were arbitrary and capricious where the plaintiff’s low bid on a public construction contract was rejected and the next-lowest bid was accepted with no record evidence regarding qualifications, reputation, or capabilities of the bidder selected.
(10-0)

Bailey v. Jefferson County Board of Supervisors, 2022-CP-00950-COA (Civil – Other)
Reversing the circuit court’s decision affirming the Board of Supervisors’ decision to removal a constable, holding that there was not substantial evidence to support the removal, rendering judgment in favor of the constable, and remanding for a determination of damages.
(8-1: Emfinger dissented without separate written opinion.)

Moore v. Jackson Public School System, 2022-CA-00595-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Reversing summary judgment dismissing a negligence claim under the MTCA, holding that the circuit court erred by granting summary judgment on other grounds where the actual motion was based only on “broad legal arguments” that did not challenge the sufficiency of the plaintiff’s evidence.
(6-3: Carlton dissented, joined by Greenlee, Westbrooks, and McDonald)

Others Orders

Carroll v. State, 2021-CP-00959-COA (denying rehearing)

Ehrhardt v. State, 2021-KA-01143-COA (denying rehearing)

Jordan v. State, 2021-KA-01421-COA (denying rehearing)

In the Matter of the Estate of Roosa v. Roosa, 2022-CA-00128-COA (denying rehearing)

Rhodes v. RL Stratton Properties LLC, 2022-CA-00338-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of September 5

I was out of town last Tuesday, so I am circling back to last week’s decisions from the Mississippi Court of Appeals. The Court handed down three opinions on Tuesday. Two are direct criminal appeals and the other one is a child custody case.

Goode v. State, 2021-KA-01310-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of murder and denial of post trial motions, holding that the trial court did not err in admitting photographs of the victim and his injuries or in denying the motion for directed verdict where there was testimony from three eyewitnesses and a medical examiner, that the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence, and that the trial court did not err in refusing five of the defendant’s proposed jury instructions.
(8-2-0: Wilson and Emfinger concurred in part and in the result sub silentio)

NOTE – The first refused instructions was a peremptory instruction. The second was a definition of “reasonable doubt.” The third was a lesser-included instruction of heat-of-passion manslaughter which the trial court deemed forfeited when the defendant took the stand and denied shooting the victim. The fourth and fifth refused instructions were on eyewitness identifications which were properly refused because there were multiple eyewitnesses.

Urban v. Urban, 2022-CP-00195-COA (Civil – Custody)
Affirming judgment denying petition for modification of custody leaving the mother with full legal and physical custody, holding that the father received sufficient service for the Rule 59(e) motion which did not require a Rule 81 summons, that the chancellor did not err in finding that the mother showed a need to correct a clear legal error which the chancellor properly did, that claims of fraud by the mother and bias of the chancellor were procedurally barred, that there was no basis for the father’s claim that the chancellor admitted hearsay, that the equitable estoppel argument was procedurally barred, and that the issue of whether the chancellor should have adopted the GAL’s recommendations could not be addressed because the GAL report was not in the record on appeal.
(9-1: Barnes concurred in the result only sub silentio)

Kilcrease v. City of Tupelo, 2022-KM-00194-COA (Criminal – Misdemeanor)
Affirming the dismissal of an appeal from municipal court for lack of jurisdiction, holding that it lacked jurisdiction where the appellant failed to timely file an appearance bond to perfect her appeal to the county court.
(5-5: McDonald dissented, joined by Carlton, Greenlee, Westbrooks, and McCarty)

NOTE – The dissent first took issue with questions about whether the municipal court violated statutory and constitutional rights:

The dissent’s discussion of the timeliness of the appeal was interesting:

Other Orders

In the Matter of the Last Will and Testament of Mamie Elizabeth Pearson Bray, 2022-CA-00011-COA (denying rehearing)

Parker v. Canton Manor, 2022-WC-00206-COA (denying rehearing)

Applewhite v. State, 2022-KA-00290-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down List

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of September 7, 2023

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down two opinions today. One is a panic-inducing civil procedure case and the other is a direct criminal appeal.

Thomas v. Bolivar County, Mississippi, 2022-CA-00445-SCT (Civil – Other)
Reversing the trial court’s grant of judgment on the pleadings in an MTCA case where the complaint was delivered to the circuit clerk on the last day of the limitations period but it was not entered into MEC until the following day (after the deadline), holding (1) when the MTCA statute of limitations falls on a Sunday, Miss. Code Ann. § 1-3-67 authorizes an extension to the following Monday; (2) delivery of the complaint, civil cover sheet, and filing fee constituted “filing” the complaint; and (3) the delay in having a summons issued did not delay the commencement date of the action.
(9-0)

PRACTICE POINT – The underlying facts of this case are nightmare fuel for civil litigators. As if the background facts weren’t enough, this part the opinion also caught my attention:

McCollum v. State, 2021-KA-01276-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of grand larceny, holding that the investigator had presented sufficient probable cause to the magistrate to justify a search warrant, that there was no hearsay admitted that would warrant reversal, and there was no error in denying a mistrial based on the presence of witness during the testimony of a State’s witness because the trial court excused the witness who violated the sequestration rule.
(7-2: King dissented, joined by Kitchens)

Other Orders

Crump v. State, 2018-M-00410 (denying application to proceed in the trial court and restricting the petitioner from filing further applications for PCR in forma pauperis)

Garcia v. State, 2021-CA-01214-SCT (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page