Tag: Hearsay

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of June 25, 2026

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down two opinions today. Both are murder cases. Both are unanimous decisions. One affirms, one reverses.

The is also a new order amending M.R.C.P. 4 and 81 that is substituted for the order amending those rules that was entered earlier this month.

Gibson v. State, 2024-KA-00726-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Reversing convictions of capital murder and armed robbery, holding that the trial court failed to conduct a proper speedy-trial hearing by taking judicial notice of a backlog in the medical examiner’s office without requiring the State to prove causation, that inadmissible hearsay was admitted, that the State misrepresented evidence during closing, and that the State used improper impeachment evidence as substantive evidence.
(7-0: King for the Court)

Wilson v. State, 2025-KA-00288-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first degree murder, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion instructing the jury and that the verdict was supported by sufficient evidence.
(7-0: Coleman for the Court)

Other Orders

In Re: The Rules of Civil Procedure, 89-R-99001-SCT (withdrawing a previous order amended Rules 4 and 81 and substituting a new one)

Higdon v. Pinkston, 2023-CT-00685-SCT (denying cert)

Bumgardner v. State, 2024-CT-00090-SCT (denying cert)

Chavers v. State, 2024-CT-00551-SCT (denying cert)

Baird v. Baird, 2024-CT-00629-SCT (dismissing pro se Petition for Writ of Certiorari, Motion for Leave to File Substituted Petition for Certiorari, Motion to Proceed Pro Se and for Recognition as Counsel of Record, and Motion to Anonymize Record and Protect Identities of Minor Children are dismissed as untimely

Cummins v. State, 2024-CT-00909-SCT (granting cert)

ABL Management, Inc. v. Rowell, 2024-CT-01007-SCT (denying cert)

Simoneaux v. State, 2024-CT-01127-SCT (denying cert)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of June 23, 2026

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down three opinions today. Two are criminal appeals and one is an appeal of summary judgment in a wrongful foreclosure claim.

Sanders v. State, 2024-KA-01401-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of twelve counts of sexual battery, holding that the indictments provided sufficient notice, that there was no merit to the double jeopardy claim, and that the evidence was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
(8-2-0: Weddle for the Court; Wilson and Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without writing)

Gwin v. State, 2025-KA-00437-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of two counts of simple assault of a law enforcement officer, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion admitting testimony over a hearsay objection, that the trial court did not improperly limit the defense’s cross-examination of an officer, and that the verdict was not contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
(6-4-0: Barnes for the Court: Wilson, McCarty, and Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without writing; Westbrooks concurred in result only without writing)

Harris v. Aurora Loan Services, 2024-CA-01118-COA (Civil – Contract)
Affirming the chancery court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants in an action challenging a foreclosure, holding that the plaintiff waived any claim to have the foreclosure sale and substitute trustee’s deed set aside when he dropped claims against the purchaser and dismissed them from the case, that he waived alleged failure to comply with the deed of trust’s notice requirements when he failed to object to the foreclosure sale and failed to allege defect in notice for over two years, that he failed to present probative evidence that the debt was canceled, and that his claims were barred by the statute of limitations.
(5-5: Wilson for the Court; Barnes, Westbrooks and Lassitter St. Pe’ concur in part and dissent in part without writing; McDonald concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by Westbrooks and Lassitter St. Pe’, and joined in party by Barnes)

Other Orders

  • Brown v. State, 2024-KA-00741-COA (granting motion to recall mandate and extend time to file for rehearing)
  • Stewart v. State, 2024-CP-01094-COA (denying rehearing)
  • McClelland v. State, 2024-KA-01422-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Talley v. State, 2025-TS-01252-COA (extending deadline appeal)

Hand Down Page


Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of April 14, 2026

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down eight opinions yesterday. The Court reversed a capital murder conviction and also decided a will contest case, a custody case, three other felony appeals, a PCR case, and a divorce case.

Greene v. State, 2024-KA-00333-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Reversing conviction of one count of capital murder, holding that the trial court erred by failing to give the jury a cautionary instruction on accomplice testimony and remanded for a new trial.
(10-0: Weddle for the Court)

In the Matter of Estate of Williams: Williams v. Myles, 2024-CA-01114-COA (Civil – Wills, Trusts & Estates)
Affirming the chancellor’s decision in a will contest, holding that the chancellor did not err in finding that decedent lacked testamentary capacity when she executed her will and that the will was invalid because of undue influence.
(10-0: Weddle for the Court)

Singleton v. State, 2024-KA-01095-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of second-degree murder, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion instructing the jury and that the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
(9-1-0: Emfinger for the Court; Westbrooks concurred in result only without writing)

In the Interests of J.S.: Betsi S. v. Mississippi Dept. of Child Protective Services, 2024-CP-01061-COA (Civil – Custody)
Affirming the youth court’s permanency decision, holding that the mother was not deprived or due process, that recusal was not required, that the motion for ADA accommodation was abandoned, and that the mother was not entitled to damages.
(9-1-0: McCarty for the Court; Westbrooks concurred in result only without writing)

Practice Point – When writing a response or reply, do not talk past the arguments made by the other side:

Gardner v. State, 2025-KA-00298-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming convictions of possession of a firearm by a felon, trafficking of fentanyl, and aggravated trafficking of meth, holding that the conviction of constructive possession of fentanyl was supported by sufficient evidence and that verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
(10-0: McCarty for the Court)

Stasher v. Stasher, 2024-CA-01302-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming the chancellor’s decisions in a divorce matter, holding that the chancellor did not manifestly or clearly err in granting divorce based on habitual cruel and inhuman treatment or in finding that the ex-husband had engaged in adultery during the marriage and that his claims about equitable distribution were without merit.
(10-0: Lawrence for the Court)

Jackson v. State, 2024-KA-01346-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of two counts of touching a child for lustful purposes, holding that the circuit court did not err in the admission of hearsay testimony and that although it was an abuse of discretion to admit a written statement that error was harmless.
(8-2-0: McDonald for the Court; Wilson and Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without writing)

Leggett v. State, 2024-CP-01214-COA, consolidated with 2024-CP-01215-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming summary dismissal of two PCR motions.
(10-0: Wilson for the Court)

Other Orders

  • Clark v. State, 2023-KA-01116-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Fraser v. State, 2023-KA-01129-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Seals v. State, 2024-KM-00448-COA (denying rehearing)
  • ABL Management, Inc. v. Rowell, 2024-CA-01007-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Daengbunga v. State, 2024-KA-01122-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Simoneaux v. State, 2024-CP-01127-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Pedrego v. State, 2025-TS-01282-COA (denying pro se motion for reconsideration of dismissal of appeal)
  • Reeves v. State, 2026-TS-00201-COA (order allowing appeal to proceed as timely)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of May 1, 2025

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down two opinions yesterday. One is a MDOR case and the other is a direct criminal appeal. The Court also entered orders amending the Rules for Court Reporters and the Justice Court Rules.

Mississippi Department of Revenue v. Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, LLC, 2023-SA-01079-SCT (Civil – State Boards & Agencies)
Affirming the chancery court’s grant of summary judgment against the MDOR, holding that MDOR improperly included freight charges in the taxpayer’s use-tax base where the taxpayer hired a third-party carrier for the shipment of the goods in a closed transaction.
(7-1-0: Sullivan specially concurred, joined by Ishee; Randolph did not participate)

Tubbs v. State, 2023-KA-01124-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of two counts of first-degree murder and two counts of desecration of a human corpse, holding that the conviction was supported by sufficient evidence and that the trial court did not commit plain error by not excluding a deputy’s testimony about the defendant’s confession.
(9-0)

Other Orders

  • Rules for Court Reporters, 89-R-99021-SCT (granting Petition of the Mississippi Court Reporters Association to Amend Rules I(U) and IX(E)(6) of the Rules and Regulations Governing Certified Court Reporters)
  • In Re: Justice Court Rules, 89-R-99024-SCT (amending Rules 9, 14, and 27 of the Rules of Justice Court)
  • Shanks v. State, 2023-CT-00271-SCT (denying cert)
  • Johnson v. SW Gambling LLC, 2023-CT-00505-SCT (denying cert)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of February 6, 2025

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down two opinions in direct criminal appeals today. The Court also issued five cert denials and granted a petition for interlocutory appeal in a premises case.

Broome v. State, 2023-KA-01163-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of aggravated assault, holding that an officer’s testimony about steps in the investigation was not hearsay, that it was improper hearsay for the officer to repeat a witness’s identification of the defendant but that it was harmless since that witness gave identification testimony at trial, and that an investigator’s lay testimony regarding the ultimate issue of fact was harmless if in error.
(7-2: Griffis concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by Sullivan)

Mackabee v. State, 2023-KA-00644-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of fourth-offense DUI, holding that there are no issues warranting appeal after reviewing counsel’s Lindsey brief and the record.
(9-0)

Other Orders

  • Smith v. State, 2019-DR-01492-SCT (denying motion for leave to file successive PCR motion)
  • Simmons v. State, 2023-CT-00130-SCT (denying cert)
  • Hyland v. State, 2023-CT-00256-SCT (denying cert)
  • Weeks. Weeks, 2023-CT-00427-SCT (denying cert)
  • Neal v. Cain, 2023-CT-00625-SCT (denying cert)
  • Davis v. State, 2023-CT-00663-SCT (denying cert)
  • Premier Entertainment Biloxi, LLC v. Ryan, 2024-IA-01175-SCT (granting interloc petition)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of December 17, 2024

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down six opinions in what appears to be the last slate of decisions from Mississippi’s appellate courts in 2024. There are two direct criminal appeals, three PCR cases, and a $1M+ personal injury verdict.

Williams v. State, 2023-KA-00346-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first-degree murder, holding that the trial court did not admit inadmissible hearsay by allowing an officer to testify about limited information that guided his investigation and that State did not improperly comment on the defendant’s failure to testify.
(4-4-1: McCarty dissented, joined in part by Barnes, Wilson, McDonald, and Lawrence; Westbrooks did not participate)

Parker v. State, 2023-KA-00550-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of two counts of fourth-offense simple domestic violence, holding that the trial court erred in admitting affidavits containing facts about the defendant’s prior offenses but that the error was harmless, that the trial court did not err in admitting the victim’s prior statement through her probation officer, and that because there was just one harmless error the doctrine of cumulative error did not apply.
(8-2-0: Westbrooks and McDonald concurred in part and in the result without writing)

Lawson v. State, 2023-CP-01008-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming the trial court’s order denying a PCR motion, holding that there was no clear error or abuse of discretion.
(10-0)

Moore v. State, 2023-CP-01147-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of PCR mtoion, holding that the claimant did not prove that his guilty plea was involuntary or that his counsel was ineffective.
(7-1-1: Westbrooks concurred in result only without writing; McDonald concurred in part and dissented in part without writing; Weddle did not participate)

Pilot Travel Centers, LLC v. Womack, 2023-CA-00035-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming a judgment after plaintiff’s jury verdict in a slip-and-fall case where the plaintiff slipped and fell on a collapsed wet-floor sign, holding that a reasonable jury could find that the collapsed wet-floor sign constituted an unreasonably or unusually dangerous condition and that the defendant had constructive knowledge of the condition, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion denying the motion for new trial that argued that expert testimony should not have been admitted, that the plaintiff’s attorney made improper statements during closing arguments, and that the non-economic damages (that the trial court reduced from $3M to $1M) was still excessive in light of the $393,000 award of compensatory damages.
(6-2-2: Westbrooks concurred in part and in the result without writing; Emfinger concurred in result only without writing; Wilson dissented, joined by Barnes and joined in party by Westbrooks)

Practice Point – The majority and the dissent agreed that the plaintiff’s “safety expert” should not have been allowed to testify as such.

Ball v. State, 2023-CP-00890-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming the trial court’s denial of the claim for PCR, holding that the claimant waived his argument that his right to be free from Double Jeopardy.
(9-1-0: Westbrooks specially concurred, joined by Barnes and McDonald)

Other Orders

  • None.

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of November 19, 2024

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down two opinions today. Both are direct criminal appeals. I will be out of the office on Thursday, so I’ll include this week’s Mississippi Supreme Court decisions in a post next week.

Smith v. State, 2023-KA-00703-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of of burglary of a dwelling and possession of a weapon as a felon, holding that the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence where the jury was presented with two different narratives of the altercation and performed its duty to weight the credibility of the competing evidence.
(10-0)

Ellzey v. State, 2022-KA-00797-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of three counts of fondling, holding that the trial court did not err in denying the motion to quash the indictment, in finding that an alleged statement by a juror regarding the incompetency of a government agency did not constitute impermissible outside influence, in limiting cross-examination of a witness, in not excluding or limiting counseling records under the plain error doctrine, in overruling the defendant’s objection to allegedly speculative testimony, in overruling a hearsay objection because the testimony was not offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted, in overruling an objection to other allegedly speculative testimony (or committed harmless error), in overruling an objection to testimony that allegedly vouched for the victim’s credibility, or in not sua sponte objecting to statements in closing argument, and dismissing the ineffectively assistance of counsel claim without prejudice, holding that there could be no cumulative error where there was at most one harmless error, and holding that other issues were waived for failure to raise them in the trial court.
(9-1-0: McCarty specially concurred, joined by Westbrooks and McDonald)

Other Orders

  • Martin v. Arceneaux, 2022-CA-01035-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Smith v. Mitchell, 2023-CA-00259-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Carpenter v. State, 2023-KA-00580-COA (denying rehearing)
  • Shipp v. State, 2023-KA-00655-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

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

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of August 16, 2022

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down seven opinions today. There are three criminal cases that address jury instructions, improper prosecutorial argument, and the admissibility of a letter aimed at the credibility of a State’s witness. There is also a divorce case addressing issues several issues related to alimony, a case deciding whether the right to arbitration was waived, a case seeking to impose a constructive trust on land, and an unemployment case.

Vector Transportation Co. v. Mississippi Department of Employment Security, 2021-CC-00574-COA (Civil – State Board and Agencies)
Affirming the circuit court and MDES Board of Review’s finding that the claimant was entitled to unemployment benefits, holding that the circuit court’s determination that the employer failed to prove that the claimant was discharged for misconduct was not contrary to law, arbitrary or capricious, or not supported by substantial evidence.
(9-0: Chief Judge Barnes did not participate.)

Clay v. State, 2021-KA-00790-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of uttering a forgery and sentence as a nonviolent habitual offender, holding that the circuit court did not err in refusing the defendant’s mistake-of-fact jury instruction considering all jury instructions read together.
(9-1-0: Judge Westbrooks concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion.)

Murry v. State, 2020-KA-01363-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first-degree murder, holding (1) that that the prosecutor made an improper “send-a-message” argument during closing but that absent the prosecutor’s improper argument the jury would have found the defendant guilty and (2) that the circuit court did not commit plain error in admitting photographs that the defendant did not object to. The Court of Appeals also declined to decide the defendant’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim and recognized that it was preserved for PCR.
(10-0)

NOTE – Here are the “send-a-message” comments that the Court of Appeals held “[w]ithout question . . . run afoul of the clear direction given by the highest appellate courts in our state and nation” and that the defendant’s attorney did not object to at trial:

Lewis v. State, 2021-KA-00736-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming convictions of conspiracy and armed robbery, holding that the trial court did not err by excluding a letter the defendant sought to introduce that accused a witness of past instances of false accusations because it was hearsay and did not fall within an exception to the inadmissibility of hearsay.
(9-1-0: Judge Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion.)

Phang v. Phang, 2021-CA-00752-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming in part and reversing in part several aspects of the chancery court’s judgment of divorce, holding that the chancellor (1) did not err in the award of permanent alimony, (2) erred in not specifying what happened to the alimony obligation if the ex-husband predeceased the ex-wife, (3) erred in requiring the ex-husband to maintain an excessive life insurance policy naming the ex-wife as the beneficiary, (4) erred in ordering the ex-husband to provide annual proof of income to his ex-wife.
(10-0)

White v. White, 2021-CP-00333-COA (Civil – Contract)
Affirming in part and reversing in part the circuit court’s dismissal of a son’s complaint against his mother seeking damages and to impose a constructive trust on land he had deeded his mother, holding that the circuit court did not err in ruling that the claim for damages was barred by the statute of limitations but did err to the extent it dismissed the claim to recover and impose a constructive trust because the 10-year statute of limitations had not run on those claims when the complaint was filed.
(10-0)

Note – There was a lengthy footnote to remand declaration, discussing the odd situation presented where the Court of Appeals was remanding to the Harrison County Circuit Court a claim seeking to impose a trust on land located in Pike and Lincoln County.

Purvis v. Mar-Jac Poultry MS, LLC, 2021-CA-00039-COA (Civil – Contract)
Affirming the circuit court’s decision granting the defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, holding that the defendant did not waive arbitration by refusing the plaintiff’s pre-suit arbitration demand or by filing a counterclaim contemporaneously with its motion to compel arbitration and holding that the arbitration provision requiring an arbitration demand within 120 days after notice of a claim did not and could not alter the three-year statute of limitations.
(6-1-2: Judge Westbrooks dissented, joined by Judge McDonald and joined in part by Judge McCarty; Judge Smith did not participate.)

Other Orders

Wofford v. State, 2020-KA-01341-COA (denying rehearing)

Adams v. State, 2020-KA-01383-COA (denying rehearing)

Smith v. Mississippi Department of Public Safety, 2021-SA-00020-COA (denying rehearing)

Frost v. State, 2021-CA-00152-COA (denying rehearing)

Edwards v. State, 2021-KA-00259-COA (denying rehearing)

Carter v. Total Foot Care, 2021-CA-00610-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down List

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of August 2, 2022

In five opinions handed down today, the Mississippi Court of Appeals tackled implied trusts, trespass to timber, hearsay exceptions, and more.

Bays v. State, 2021-KA-00244-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming a conviction of one count of sexual battery by a person in a position of trust or authority, holding that it was error to admit testimony containing a hearsay statement by the 12-year-old victim under the 801(d)(1)(C) statement of identification hearsay exception but that the error was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence supporting the guilty verdict and holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant’s untimely request to submit evidence of another perpetrator or in denying the defendant’s request to re-call the victim.
(9-1-0: no separate opinion)

Ainsworth v. Plunk, 2021-CA-00488-COA (Civil – Wills, Trusts, and Estates)
Affirming the chancery court’s order requiring a father to transfer title of real property back to his two daughters, holding that the chancery court properly applied the remedy of an implied trust under the peculiar facts of this case where (1) the father deeded land to his daughters and reserved a life estate for himself prior to his upcoming marriage in case the marriage ended in divorce, which it did, (2) the father then told the daughters to deed the land back to him and he would execute a new deed where the daughters would be tenants in common with full rights to devise their half interest, (3) the daughters quitclaimed their interest back to the father, (4) and the father then said he would only deed back the land if one of the daughters gave up an African-American baby she had adopted.
(8-2-0: no separate opinions)

NOTE – In addition to its startling facts that would make a compelling movie, this opinion contains a helpful discussion of constructive trusts and resulting trusts, and the differences between the two that would not necessarily make a compelling movie.

Terpening v. F.L. Crane & Sons, Inc., 2021-CA-00544-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming summary judgment in a wrongful death action against an employer stemming from a fatal collision involving its employee, holding that the employer was not vicariously liable for the employee’s negligence because the employee was driving home from a week at a remote job site in a personal vehicle when the accident occurred and thus was not in the course and scope of his employment.
(10-0)

NOTES – The Court of Appeals held that the circuit court did not err in declining to apply the workers’ comp “traveling employee doctrine” outside of the workers’ comp arena. Additionally, the Court of Appeals dropped this handy paragraph to cite when the opposing party’s argument relies on out-of-state authorities:

(Please disregard this if I am ever the opposing party citing out-of-state authorities.)

Nalls v. State, 2021-KA-00592-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming convictions of attempted murder and possession of a firearm by a felon, holding that the trial court did not err in denying the defendant’s motion for JNOV because the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence and then rejecting several arguments made in the defendant’s additional, pro se brief.
(10-0)

Green v. Poirrier Properties, L.L.C., 2021-CP-00704-COA (Civil – Real Property)
Affirming the chancellor’s decision in a timber-trespass case, holding that the chancellor’s finding that the defendant’s removal of timber constituted a willful act and the chancellor’s award of damages were supported by substantial evidence.
(8-2-0: no separate opinions)

Other Orders

Booker v. State, 2018-CA-00664-COA (denying rehearing)

Manuel v. State, 2020-KA-00711-COA (denying rehearing)

Bridges v. State, 2020-CA-00816-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down List