Tag: jury instructions

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of Late

Because of a string of litigation deadlines followed by a blessed week out of the office last week, I am behind on summaries. It has been a relatively slow month for hand downs in terms of volume from the Mississippi Supreme Court, so I am consolidating the last few weeks in this one post.

April 2, 2024 (a bonus Tuesday decision)

Barker v. Ivory, 2024-EC-00347-SCT (Civil – Election Contest)
Affirming the circuit court’s decision finding that a would-be candidate for Alderman was not qualified, holding that issues regarding the validity of the petition to object were procedurally barred and that the trial court’s decision that he failed to satisfy the two-year residency requirement was supported by sufficient evidence in the record.
(9-0)

April 4, 2024

State of Mississippi v. Aldrich, 2022-SA-01088-SCT (Civil – Real Property)
Affirming the chancery court’s ruling in favor of a private landowner in a dispute over whether an acre of Mississippi coastal land was properly designated as State-owned tidelands, holding that the secretary of state had failed to following statutory guidelines in drafting the maps and failed to meet its burden of proof that the artificial filling was not the product of the deposition of oyster shells and dredge spoils.
(7-1-0: Kitchens concurred in part and in the result without writing; Randolph did not participate)

Archie v. State, 2022-KA-00326-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming convictions of conspiracy and capital murder, holding that the defendant was entitled to an instruction on his alibi theory of defense but that the trial court’s error refusing of that instruction was harmless error, that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing the defendant’s proposed reasonable doubt instruction on the basis that it was cumulative, that the trial court did not err by admitting photos of the defendant that were authenticated by a witness other than the photographer, that the verdicts were not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence, and that the ineffective assistance of counsel claim was without merit.
(5-4: Coleman dissented, joined by Kitchens, King, and Ishee)

NOTE – The dissent asserted that Mississippi law required an alibi instruction and that the failure to give the alibi instruction could not be harmless error.

Hayes v. Thomas,  2023-EC-00229-SCT (Civil – Election Contest)
Reversing the circuit court’s grant of a default judgment a year after an election contest was filed questioning the vote count, holding that a default judgment was not permissible in this general election contest (per section 23-15-951) and that the petitioner’s failure to diligently prosecute her contest required dismissal with prejudice.
(9-0)

April 11, 2024

– No opinions (other orders are below)

April 18, 2024

Robinson v. State, 2023-KA-00184-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of heat-of-passion manslaughter, holding that whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to request a right-to-stand-your-ground jury instruction could not be analyzed on direct appeal based on direct appeal and holding that the State’s evidence was sufficient disprove the defendant’s self-defense claim.
(9-0)

Other Orders

April 4, 2024

  • Odom v. State, 2021-CT-00676-SCT (denying cert)
  • D.W. v. C.E., 2021-IA-01075-SCT (dismissing interloc as moot)
  • Hobby v. Ott, 2021-CT-01305-SCT (denying cert)
  • Pickle v. State, 2022-CT-00929-SCT (dismissing cert petition as untimely)

April 11, 2024

  • Smith v. State, 2020-CT-00774-SCT (denying cert)
  • Carpenter v. State, 2022-CT-00398-SCT (denying cert)
  • Hall v. State, 2022-CT-01097-SCT (denying cert)
  • Pryer v. State, 2023-M-01230-SCT (denying pro se petition to appeal)
  • Bennett v. Bennett, 2023-TS-01385 (ordering compliance with MRAP 10(b)(4))

April 18, 2024

  • Roberson v. State, 2021-CT-01182-SCT (denying cert)
  • Michael P. v. Thomas, 2021-CT-01288-SCT (denying cert)
  • Bennett v. State, 2021-CA-01313-SCT (denying rehearing)
  • Tubwell v. FV-1, Inc., 2021-CT-01345-SCT (granting pro se cert petition)
  • In Re: Administrative Orders of the Supreme Court of Mississippi, 2024-AD-00001-SCT (directing the disbursement of $138,454.56 in civil legal assistance funds among the MS Center for Legal Services, MS Volunteer Lawyers Project, and North MS Rural Legal Services)
  • Reeves v. Gary, 2024-EC-00406-SCT (granting motion to vacate response a response and the circuit court’s order in an election contest)

Hand Down Pages

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of March 26, 2024

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down three opinions on Tuesday. The case that stood out to me was Murphy v. William Carey University not because of the result but because of how the Court of Appeals discussed the Horton doctrine. The special concurrence pulled no punches.

Frazier v. State, 2022-KA-00896-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first-degree murder with firearm enhancement, holding that the circuit court did not err in denying a heat-of-passion manslaughter instruction and did not abuse its discretion in refusing to allow the defendant to read proffered testimony from the first trial that ended with a mistrial on the first-degree murder charge.
(10-0)

Murphy v. William Carey University, 2022-CA-00379-COA (Civil – Med Mal)
Reversing the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in a med mal case based on lack of pre-suit notice and the statute of limitations, holding that the defendant waived those defenses by failing to pursue them while actively participating in litigation.
(7-2: Lawrence specially concurred joined by McDonald, Smith, and Emfinger, and joined in part by Wilson and Westbrooks; Greenlee dissented, joined by Carlton)

NOTE – I find the discussion of the Horton doctrine fascinating. The majority opinion and the special concurrence threw some shade at the development of the Horton doctrine and how it has been applied. The majority opinion included this statement and footnote:


The special concurrence upped the ante and sharply criticized the state of the Horton doctrine. I read the special concurrence (carrying four votes and two “in part” votes) as a challenge to the Mississippi Supreme Court to clean up the Horton doctrine:

The special concurrence concluded with this:

I am not sure this is the best “test case” for the Horton doctrine based on the facts, but I will be watching for a cert petition.

The City of Pascagoula, Mississippi v. Cumbest, 2022-CA-00745-COA (Civil – State Boards & Agencies)
Reversing on direct appeal and reversing on cross-appeal in a case over whether private property was “menace” under Miss. Code Ann. section 21-19-11, holding that the circuit court erred in reversing the city council’s determination that the property was a “menace” and finding no abuse of discretion in the circuit court’s denial of the property owner’s decision denying the owner’s motion to compel production of documents.
(5-4: Westbrooks concurred in part and dissented in part without separate written opinion; McDonald concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by Wilson, Westbrooks, and McCarty; Lawrence did not participate)

NOTE – The concurrence took issue with the City making the “menace” determination based on the condition of the property before the hearing and not at the time of the hearing.

Other Orders

Friley v. State, 2021-KA-00791-COA (denying rehearing)

Smith v. Ford, 2022-CA-00255-COA (denying rehearing)

Burns v. BancorpSouth Bank, 2022-CA-00404-COA (denying rehearing)

Moore v. Mississippi Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company, 2022-CA-00555-COA (denying rehearing)

Edwards v. State, 2022-KA-00719-COA (recalling mandate and permitting pro se motion for rehearing to proceed)

Scales v. State, 2022-KA-00856-COA (denying rehearing)

Thompson v. Thompson, 2022-CA-01014-COA (dismissing motion for rehearing as untimely)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of March 19, 2024

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down eight opinions today. There was a med mal case dismissed on statute of limitations grounds, an IIED verdict, an interpleader by a bank to determine the appropriate beneficiary-on-death of a CD, a zoning decision, a felony conviction, and a few PCR cases.

Jordan v. States, 2022-CP-00874-COA, consolidated with 2022-CP-00877-COA and 2023-CP-00072-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denials of three PCR motions, holding that all three motions were barred as subsequent PCR motions and that no exception to the bar was supported.
(10-0)

Jones v. State, 2022-KA-01117-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of two counts of child exploitation after the “underage female” the defendant attempted to meet up with turned out to be an undercover officer, holding that the entrapment jury instruction was properly rejected and that the convictions were not against he overwhelming weight of evidence.
(10-0)

Rogers v. NewSouth NeuroSpine LLC, 2022-CP-01036-COA (Civil – Med Mal)
Affirming the circuit court’s decision granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss based on the statute of limitations and denying post-judgment motions, holding that the circuit court did not abuse its discretion denying the pro se plaintiff’s Rule 60 motion and also denying the defendants’ motion for sanctions, damages, and fees.
(10-0)

Gray v. Johnson, 2023-CA-00339-COA (Civil – Wills, Trusts & Estates)
Affirming the chancellor’s decision in an interpleader initiated by a bank over the proper “pay-on-death” beneficiary of a CD, holding that the designation was latently ambiguous but that extrinsic evidence supported the chancellor’s decision whcih was not an abuse of discretion and was not wrong or clearly erroneous.
(6-4-0: Wilson, McCarty, and Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Greenlee concurred in result only without separate written opinion)

Jackson County, Mississippi, v. Marcellus, 2023-CA-00111-COA (Civil – State Boards & Agencies)
Reversing the circuit court’s decision that had reversed the decision of the Board of Supervisors denying a request to reclassify property from residential to commercial, holding that the Board’s decision was not arbitrary and capricious that the owner had not proved a change in character and a public need by clear and convincing evidence.
(9-0: Lawrence did not participate)

Bain v. State, 2023-CP-00206-COA (Civil – PCR)
Reversing dismissal of PCR motion for lack of jurisdiction, holding that the petitioner did not need to obtain permission from the Supreme Court to file his petition.
(9-1-0: Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion)

Green v. State, 2023-CP-00448-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming the dismissal of a PCR motion, holding that the circuit court did not err in finding that the motion was barred as successive and that none of the exceptions applied, and that they lacked merit.
(8-2-0: McCarty and Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion.)

Weaver v. Ross, 2022-CA-00426-COA (Civil – Torts)
Affirming a judgment in favor of a car restorer against a man who initiated litigation by suing for alleged negligent restoration after a jury trial, holding that the trial court did not err in excluding medical records related to the owner’s blood pressure for lack of authentication and an invoice on allegedly comparative restoration, that the verdict on IIED was supported by sufficient evidence and not against the overwhelming weight of it, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding attorney’s fees.
(6-4-0: McCarty specially concurred, joined by Greenlee, Westbrooks, McDonald, Lawrence, and Smith; Wilson concurred in part and in the result, joined by Lawrence, McCarty, and Emfinger and joined in part by Greenlee, Westbrooks, McDonald, and Smith.)

NOTE – McCarty’s special concurrence has precedential effect. You should read it for its discussion and clarification of the fact that claims for IIED cannot stem from the distress caused solely by litigation.

Wilson’s concurrence was one full vote short of precedential effect, but was joined in part by four additional judges. Wilson joined Parts I and II of the majority opinion, but parted ways over the analysis of the attorney’s fees issue. Wilson agreed the judgment should be affirmed because the challenge to the award of attorney’s fees was procedurally barred, but would have reversed if it was not barred.

PRACTICE POINT – Wilson’s concurrence contains a good reminder of the importance of reviewing the record on appeal for completeness. Don’t assume the circuit clerk included everything you designated.

Other Orders

DeJohnette v. State, 2022-KA-00249-COA (denying rehearing)

Gilmer v. State, 2022-KM-00257-COA (denying rehearing)

Hutson v. Hutson, 2022-CA-00569-COA (denying rehearing)

Daly v. Raines, 2022-CA-00600-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of March 5, 2024

I’m back. Again. I would like to think I will go back and summarize the last few weeks that I have missed but that is probably water under the bridge at this point. Pressing forward, the Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down seven opinions today. These decisions cover custody, felonies, personal injury, unemployment, and zoning. Notably, two criminal convictions were reversed.

Patrick v. Patrick, 2021-CA-00891-COA (Civil – Custody)
Affirming the chancery court’s denial of the mother’s petition for contempt and modification and granting the father’s motion for modification, holding that the issue of custody was clearly before the chancellor who properly determined that there was a material change in circumstances that adversely affected the children, conducted a proper Albright analysis, and was within his discretion to order a change in legal and physical custody.
(8-1-1: McCarty concurred in part and in the result and McDonald concurred in part and dissented in part. Neither wrote.)

Allen v. State, 2022-KA-00419-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Reversing convictions six counts of statutory rape, holding that the jury was not properly instructed as to the State’s burden of proof and remanding for a new trial.
(9-1-0: McDonald concurred in result only without writing.)

Practice Point: The erroneous instruction was submitted by the defense, but the Court noted that the “invited-error doctrine” did not apply where the jury was not properly instructed on the elements of the crime. Here is the Court’s summary of the issues with the jury instructions:

Fletcher v. State, 2022-KA-00868-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of capital murder and sentence as habitual offender, holding that the trial court did not err when it failed to suppress the defendant’s statement to law enforcement officials.
(10-0)

The Avion Group, Inc. v. The City of Oxford, 2023-CA-00169-COA (Civil – Other)
Affirming the circuit court’s decision denying an ordinance variance to repair a wall/fence that enclosed the petitioner’s property, holding that the petitioner did not waive its challenge to the city’s code interpretation but that the circuit court’s interpretation of the code provisions at issue were not erroneous.
(10-0)

Carter v. C&S Canopy, Inc., 2022-CA-00730-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming summary judgment in favor of a driver and his employer in an auto-negligence case, holding that there was no evidence to support the plaintiff’s claim that the driver negligently continued to drive a “sluggish” truck on the interstate, that the defendants were negligent in their efforts to get the truck towed, that the location of reflective triangles was the proximate cause of the crash, that the defendant could have safely moved the disabled truck anywhere other than where he did, that the driver should have registered as a for-hire carrier, or that the employer negligently failed to train the driver.

Appellate Math Warning: None of us signed up for this.

Marshall v. State, 2022-KA-00541-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Reversing conviction of first-degree murder, holding that the circuit court erred in denying the defense’s peremptory strikes of three jurors, holding that the defense provided valid, race-neutral reasons for the strikes.
(10-0)

Cain v. M.D.E.S., 2023-CC-00188-COA (Civil – State Boards & Agencies)
Affirming denial of claim for unemployment benefits, holding that the circuit court properly dismissed the claimant’s appeal of denial as untimely.
(10-0)

Other Orders

Walker v. State, 2022-KA-00482-COA (denying rehearing)

Gregory Meridian Acquisition, LLC v. McFarland, 2022-CA-00580-COA (denying rehearing)

Fox v. Fox, 2022-CA-00918-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

Double Issue: Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of February 6, 2024 and February 13, 2024

[Edited to correct the year in the title. I am behind, but I am not a whole year behind.]

I was about snowed under last week so I am trying to catch up here a bit. The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down four opinions on February 6 and another nine on February 13.

February 6, 2024

Porter v. State, 2023-CP-00091-COA (Civil – Other)
Vacating the trial court’s denial of a request to be reclassified as a non-habitual offender, holding that the petitioner was not a habitual offender but that his claims were filed in the wrong county so the case was remanded with instructions for the trial court to transfer to the appropriate county.
(9-0: Smith did not participate)

Gilmore v. State, 2023-CP-00527-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of PCR motion, holding that the trial court did not err in finding that the motion was time-barred and not subject to any of the exceptions.
(9-0: Emfinger did not participate)

Ellis v. Turner-Johnson Dodge, Inc., 2022-CA-01126-COA (Civil – Contract)
Affirming the county court’s order compelling arbitration, holding that there was a valid, binding arbitration agreement and that the dispute was within the scope of the agreement.
(7-2: Westbrooks and McDonald dissented; Smith did not participate)

Practice Point – Cite the record early and often in your briefs:

Moates v. State, 2022-KA-01062-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first degree murder, burglary of a dwelling under circumstances likely to terrorize, and simple domestic violence, holding that the trial court did not err in denying a motion to sever the first-degree murder charge, that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of prior bad acts, that the evidence was sufficient to support the simple domestic violence conviction, and that retroactive misjoinder argument was moot.
(10-0)

Practice Point – This is a good reminder that “prejudice” is not the test under Rule 403.

Other Orders

Gilbert v. State, 2021-KA-01265-COA (denying rehearing)

Kilcrease v. City of Tupelo, 2022-KM-00194-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

February 13, 2024

Williams v. Bryant, 2022-CA-00630-COA (Civil – Wills, Trusts & Estates)
Affirming the chancellor’s decision in a will contest, holding that the chancellor did not err in determining that there was a confidential relationship but that the evidence did not show abuse or suspicious circumstances or active involvement in procurement or execution of the will that would create a presumption of undue influence.
(9-1-0: McDonald concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion)

Allen v. State, 2022-KA-00935-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of capital murder, holding that the trial court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on the defendant’s alternative defense theory of heat-of-passion manslaughter.
(10-0)

Netherland v. State, 2022-CP-01236-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming the circuit court’s denial of a PCR motion, holding that the circuit court did not err in finding that the petitioner’s Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights were not violated when law enforcement recorded the petitioner selling drugs to an informant and that there was no merit to the ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim.
(10-0)

Brooks v. State, 2022-KA-01016-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of burglary of a dwelling, simple assault domestic violence, and possession of a firearm by a felon, holding that the conviction for possession of a firearm was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
(8-2-0: Barnes and Westbrooks concurred in part and in the result without writing)

EEECHO Inc. v. Mississippi Dept. Env’t Quality Permit Bd, 2022-SA-01068-COA (Civil – State Boards and Agencies)
Affirming the chancery court’s decision affirming MDEQ’s Permit Board’s decision to issue water quality certifications, holding that the Permit Board did not err by not making factual findings regarding the possible storage of explosive ammunition, that the Permit Board’s failure to issue a revise public notice was not arbitrary or capricious, that the Permit Board’s decision that the subject property was preferable to the alternative project sites, and that the Permit Board’s failure to conduct an environmental justice review.
(8-2: McDonald dissented, joined by Westbrooks; Westbrooks dissented without writing)

Smith v. Smith, 2022-CA-00183-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming in part and reversing in part the chancery court’s child custody and division or martial estate decisions, holding that the chancellor did not err or abuse his discretion in awarding custody to the father or in his visitation ruling, but that the chancellor erred by classifying one of the father’s businesses as separate property.
(10-0)

Wade v. State, 2022-CA-00370-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming the trial court’s denial of a PCR motion, holding that the trial court’s decision that the plea was voluntary and intelligent notwithstanding the petitioner’s low intellectual ability, that there was no merit to the ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim, and that Miller did not apply because the felony convictions did not mandate life imprisonment.
(6-4-0: Emfinger concurred in part and in the result without writing; Carlton, Westbrooks, and McDonald concurred in result only without writing)

Hunter v. State, 2022-CP-01269-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of PCR motion, holding that the circuit court did not err in denying the motion as untimely.
(10-0)

Clarksdale Pub. Utilities Comm’ v. Miss. Dept. of Emp’t Sec., 2022-CC-01085-COA (Civil – State Boards & Agencies)
Affirming the circuit court’s decision affirming MDES Review Board’s decision approving unemployment benefits, holding that MDES was not collaterally estopped from making the benefits decision as a result of MDEC and CPOC having different standards and definitions of misconduct, that the ALJ did not err in refusing the admit 900 pages of exhibits that the employer offered for lack of foundation, and that there was sufficient evidence in the record to support the ALJ’s findings.
(3-2-3: Westbrooks and McCarty concurred in part and in the result without writing; Wilson concurred in the result only without writing; Greenlee concurred in part and dissented in part without writing; Carlton concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by Greenlee and Lawrence; Barnesn did not participate)

Other Orders

Bradshaw v. Bradshaw, 2017-CT-01731-COA (granting motion to seal file on appeal)

Odom v. State, 2021-KA-00676-COA (denying rehearing)

Harrison v. Harrison, 2022-CA-00274-COA (denying rehearing)

Litton v. Litton, 2022-CA-00712-COA (denying rehearing)

Johnson v. Drake, 2022-CA-00818-COA (denying rehearing)

Forrest v. State, 2022-KA-00844-COA (granting pro se letter motion to recall mandate)

Patel v. State, 2022-CA-00985-COA (denying rehearing)

Fox v. State, 2022-KA-00988-COA (granting motion to expedite mandate)

Harvey v. State, 2023-CT-00157-COA (recalling mandate sua sponte)

Clark v. State, 2023-TS-01116-COA (granting motion to proceed out of time)

Odom v. State, 2023-TS-01165-COA (granting public defender’s motion withdraw, to substitute counsel, and respond to order to show cause)

Winn Dixie Stores v. Little, 2023-WC-01177-COA (granting motion to dismiss appeal as interlocutory)

Holifiend v. State, 2023-TS-01320-COA (granting motion to proceed out of time)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of January 30, 2024

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

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of January 18, 2024

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down four opinions on Thursday, January 18. Of the four, there were three direct criminal appeals and the fourth was an appeal in a money dispute between a county and a school district.

Douglas v. State, 2022-KA-00859-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of sale of cocaine and life sentence as habitual offender, holding that the defendant waived defective indictment argument by failing to object in the trial court, that the argument that his indictment was improper because his name was incorrect was barred and without merit, that the defendant was not denied the right to represent himself because he never asked to, that the judge did not err by not recusing sua sponte, that witness credibility was for the jury to determine, that the defendant’s Fourth Amendment arguments were barred and without merit, that there was no merit to the defendant’s chain-of-custody argument, that there was no merit to the defendant’s Brady claim, that the defendant’s arguments about the amount of the controlled substance were without merit, that the defendant’s Confrontation Clause argument was barred and without merit, that the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence, that the defendant’s argument that his right to a public trial was not violated where the jury deliberated and returned a verdict after business hours, and that the ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim was without merit.
(9-0)

Davis v. State, 2022-KA-00696-SCT, consolidated with Jackson v. State, 2022-KA-00731-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming convictions of two counts of first-degree murder but vacating a portion of the sentences, holding that the firearm-enhancement portion of the sentences was prohibited because a greater minimum sentence (life sentence) was otherwise provided for, but holding that under the plain error doctrine there was no evidence the defendants did not receive a fair trial by an impartial jury where the Batson challenge procedure was not followed to determine if the race-neutral reason was pretextual, that the verdict supported by sufficient evidence and was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence, that the trial court did not err in denying one defendant’s motion to server, and the cumulative errors doctrine did not require reversal.
(6-3: Kitchens dissented, joined by King and Ishee; King dissented, joined by Kitchens and Ishee)

Clarke County, Mississippi v. Quitman School District, 2022-CA-00471-SCT (Civil – Other)
Reversing on direct appeal and on cross appeal in a case about whether a school district was entitled to funds recovered by a county from the bankruptcy proceedings of a delinquent taxpayer, holding that the statutory scheme for funding public schools does not entitle school districts to receive delinquent taxes recovered years later in bankruptcy proceedings that are outside of the statutory scheme so the chancellor erred in awarding the school district a portion of the funds.
(9-0)

Stewart v. State, 2022-KA-00107-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of sexual battery, holding that in the context of the COVID-19 global pandemic the trial court was within its discretion to have the defendant attend a pretrial, tender-years hearing virtually; that the verdict was supported by sufficient evidence; that issues related to jury instructions were barred for failure to object and there was no plain error; and that the trial court did not err in sustaining the State’s objection to certain lines of questions while defense counsel was cross-examining witnesses.
(6-3: Kitchens concurred in result only, joined by King and Ishee)

Other Orders

In Re: State Intervention Courts Advisory Committee, 89-R-99039-SCT (approving the designation of Katharine Surkin, Director of the Administrative Office of the Courts, of Justice Robert P. Chamberlin as Chair of the State Intervention Courts Advisory Committee and the following as members through December 31, 2024: Judge Michael M. Taylor, Judge Winston L. Kidd, Judge Robert Helfrich, Judge Charles E. Webster, Judge Kathy King Jackson, Judge Randi P. Mueller, Representative Angela Cockerham, Nathan Blevins Deputy Commissioner of Community Corrections, MDOC, Mark Smith, Executive Director, State Veterans Affairs Board, Andrea Sanders, Commissioner, Miss. Department of Child Protection Services, and Consuelo Walley, Coordinator, Jones County Drug Ct, 18th Judicial Circuit, and further designating the following alternate members who may attend and vote in the absence of an appointed committee member: Judge Mary “Betsy” Cotton, Judge Mike Dickinson, and Judge Walt Brown.

Cochran v. State, 2014-M-00090 (denying “Request for Post-Conviction Forensic, DNA, and Handwriting Testing,” finding that the filing was frivolous, and warning that future frivolous filings may be sanctioned)

Trest v. State, 2021-CT-00968-SCT (denying cert)

Jackson Pub. Sch. Dist. v. Jackson Federation of Teachers and PSRPS, 2022-CA-00464-SCT (denying cert)

Brent v. MDHS, 2022-CT-00529-SCT (granting cert)

In Re: Administrative Orders of the Supreme Court of Mississippi, 2024-AD-00001-SCT (directing the disbursement of $215,281.86 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 January 16, 2024

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down eight opinions on Tuesday. The Court covered a lot of subject matter including trusts, unemployment benefits, workers’ comp, and several direct appeals of criminal convictions.

Rutland v. Regions Bank, 2022-CA-00720-COA (Civil – Wills, Trusts & Estates)
Affirming the circuit court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of a trustee who filed a dec action seeking a judgment that the trust did not have to pay funeral expenses, holding that the circuit court did not err in finding that the trust was irrevocable, was not terminated by a subsequent divorce, and that the contents of the trust should be disbursed to the children.
(10-0)

Black v. State, 2022-KA-01101-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of capital murder based on robbery, holding that the circuit court did not err in rejecting the defendant’s manslaughter instruction, in sustaining the State’s objection to defense counsel calling a detective a “liar” during closing, or in not issuing a cautionary instruction regarding the written transcript of the defendant’s interview with law enforcement.
(8-1-1: McDonald concurred in part and in the result without writing; Westbrooks concurred in part and dissented in part without writing)

Coe Law Firm PLLC v. MDES, 2022-CC-01285-COA (Civil – State Boards & Agencies)
Affirming the circuit court’s order dismissing the employer’s appeal of the MDES Board of Review’s order upholding the ALJ’s grant of unemployment benefits, holding that the employer failed to show good cause for not appearing at the ALJ de novo hearing and that issues of misconduct by the employee were therefore moot.
(10-0)

Jones v. State, 2022-KA-01199-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of attempted aggravated assault with a firearm enhancement, holding that the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
(9-1-0: McCarty concurred in part and in the result without writing)

Simmons v. State, 2022-KA-01260-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of receiving stolen property and first-degree murder, holding that the circuit did not err in denying the defendant’s motion for JNOV where the evidence was sufficient for both conviction and that the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
(10-0)

MTD Products, Inc. v. Moore, 2023-WC-00199-COA (Civil – Workers’ Comp)
Affirming the MWCC’s award of PPD for 50 weeks for an upper-left extremity injury, holding that substantial evidence support the MWCC’s finding that the claimant sustained a 25% industrial loss of use that exceeded her 15% functional medical impairment where the claimant’s job duties had to be modified and she was reassigned to different tasks after her injury.
(10-0)

Vlasak v. State, 2022-CP-01211-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Dismissing appeal of the circuit court’s denial of a motion for reconsideration after denying the defendant’s motion to modify sentence that was filed after a guilty plea that was filed after the term of court ended, holding that that the circuit court correctly found that this was essentially a direct appeal after a guilty plea.
(10-0)

Gilmer v. State, 2022-KM-00257-COA (Criminal – Misdemeanor)
Affirming the circuit court’s decision affirming the county court’s order dismissing an appeal of a conviction in justice court of willfully discharging a firearm towards a dwelling and disturbing the peace, holding that there was no error in dismissing the appeal after the defendant failed to appear at his trial de novo.
(8-1-0: Wilson concurred in part and in the result without writing; Emfinger did not participate)

Other Orders

Smith v. State, 2020-KA-00774-COA (denying rehearing)

White v. State, 2021-KA-00818-COA (denying rehearing)

Hobby v. Ott, 2021-CA-01305-COA (denying rehearing)

Ndicu v. Gacheri, 2022-CA-00415-COA (denying rehearing)

Wheeler v. Miss. Limestone Corp., 2022-WC-00534-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of December 12, 2023

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down eight decisions on Tuesday that cover a lot of territory. There is something for just about everybody.

Read on down for a case that underscores the importance of keeping up with the weekly hand downs from the Mississippi Supreme Court and Mississippi Court of Appeals. (Subscribing to this blog probably doesn’t hurt you in that endeavor.)

Coogan v. Nationwide Prop. and Cas. Ins. Co., 2022-CA-01063-COA (Civil – Insurance)
Affirming partial summary judgment in policy holders’ suit against their auto liability carrier, holding that the carrier had an arguably reasonable basis to support its claims handling the circuit court did not err in finding that there was no genuine issue of material fact on the bad faith punitive damages claim or the Veasley damages claim.
(6-2-1: McCarty concurred in part and in the result without writing, Westbrooks concurred in result only without writing, McDonald dissented without writing, Lawrence did not participate)

Forrest v. State, 2022-KA-00844-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first-degree murder, holding that the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence and that the court did not admit inadmissible hearsay or irrelevant evidence, and dismissing the ineffective assistance of counsel claim without prejudice.
(10-0)

Hills v. Manns, 2022-CA-00774-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming modification of visitation schedule, holding that the chancellor did not err in not dismissing the mother’s petition on the basis of res judicata, not awarding him attorney’s fees, or in awarding the mother final decision-making authority.
(10-0)

Strong v. Acara Solutions, Inc., 2022-CA-01240-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Reversing the trial court’s dismissal of a personal injury lawsuit on judicial estoppel grounds, holding that the case should be remanded to allow the circuit court to apply the test from a recent Mississippi Supreme Court decision that was handed down after the circuit court’s ruling.
(10-0)

PRACTICE POINT – This case illustrates the importance of keeping up with decisions handed down weekly by Mississippi’s appellate courts. (By extension, this case illustrates why you and all of your friends should subscribe to the Mississippi Appeals Blog – I covered the Saunders decision here when it was handed down.)

PRACTICE POINT (continued): Though the Mississippi Supreme Court’s decision in Saunders was handed down after the summary judgment order was entered, the Supreme Court’s decision in Jones, infra, with its special concurrence, was handed down before the summary judgment proceedings. So the precedential special concurrence in Jones that controlled this case was in force during the summary judgment proceedings. This case serves as a good reminder that special concurrences that garner a majority of the court have the force of precedent. (Another shameless plug: I covered the Jones decision here when it was handed down and specifically discussed the precedential value of the special concurrence.)

Barefield v. Barefield, 2022-CA-00834-COA (Civil – Torts-Other)
Affirming the chancellor’s order requiring the former member/owner of an investment company to pay a forensic accountant’s fee for services during litigation among all members/owners, holding that the exert was court-appointed and the chancellor had discretion to order the party whose actions necessitated the lawsuit to pay the fees.
(8-2-0: McCarty concurred in part and in result without writing; Wilson concurred in result only without writing)

Henderson v. State, 2022-KA-00661-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first-degree murder, holding that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction and the verdict was not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
(10-0)

Nichols v. State, 2022-KA-00202-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Reversing conviction of first-degree murder and remanding for new trial, holding that the circuit court erred by failing to instruct the jury on the “castle doctrine,” while also holding that the evidence to support the conviction was legally sufficient so the remedy was a new trial.
(10-0)

Miss. Dept. of Human Servs. v. Johnson, 2022-SA-00605-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming the chancellor’s decision voiding a 2002 paternity and child-support order was void for insufficient service of process, holding that in light of MDHS’s admission that failed to effect proper service under Rule 81(d) MDHS’s arguments under the doctrine of laches, judicial estoppel, unjust enrichment, and public policy failed.
(6-4: Greenlee dissented, joined by Wilson, Lawrence, and Emfinger)

Other Orders

Gillen v. Gillen, 2021-CA-00837-COA (granting motion for appellate attorneys’ fees)

Moore v. State, 2022-KA-00327-COA (granting appearance as counsel, but denying motion to substitute and motion to file supplemental brief)

Diming v. State, 2022-KA-00412-COA (recalling mandate and granting motion for time to file motion for rehearing)

Russell v. State, 2022-KA-00447-COA (recalling mandate and granting motion for time to file motion for rehearing)

Greater Hamilton Grove Baptist Church v. Hamilton Grove Missionary Baptist Church, 2022-CA-00518-COA (denying rehearing)

Rehabilitation Centers, Inc. v. Williams, 2023-WC-00453-COA (denying motion for reconsideration)

Mitchell v. State, 2023-TS-00764-COA (granting motion to proceed out-of-time)

Robinson v. State, 2023-TS-00935-COA (dismissing untimely appeal)

Britton v. State, 2023-TS-01060-COA (dismissing untimely appeal)

Rutherford v. State, 2023-TS-01066-COA (dismissing appeal for lack of appealable judgment)

Rutherford v. State, 2023-TS-01069-COA (dismissing appeal for lack of appealable judgment)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Supreme Court Decisions of November 30, 2023

The Mississippi Supreme Court handed down three opinions today. There is a case addressing a county’s decisions regarding license and tax exception, an appeal of the denial of a petition for a certificate of rehabilitation to regain the right to possess firearms, and a direct criminal appeal that resulted in a 5-4 decision.

Stokes v. Jackson Sales & Storage Company, 2022-CA-00371-SCT (Civil -Other)
Affirming in part and reversing in part the circuit court’s rulings in a licensing and tax dispute, holding the company’s license is and has been valid since issuance, the license is subject to renewal, the County forfeited its right to taxes during the years it had granted an exemption, and the County had discretion to grant (or not grant) the exemption.
(9-0)

Francis v. State, 2022-CA-00964-SCT (Civil – Other)
Affirming the circuit court’s denial of a petition for a certificate of rehabilitation to restore the right to possess a firearm after felony conviction, holding that the denial of a certificate of rehabilitation is an appealable order, but that the circuit court did not abuse its discretion in denying the certificate and that no hearing was required.
(9-0)

Gunn v. State, 2022-KA-00807-SCT (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first degree murder, attempted murder, aggravated assault, and shooting into a dwelling, holding that the trial court did not err by granting a jury instruction allowing an inference of deliberate design and that the verdict was not contrary to the weight of the evidence.
(5-4: Coleman dissented, joined by Kitchens, King, and Ishee)

Note – Here is what the majority said about the jury instruction at issue:

And here is the dissent’s conclusion:

Other Orders

Miller v. Board of Trustees of Second Baptist Church of Starkville, 2020-CT-01384-SCT (denying cert)

Kirk v. Newton, 2021-CT-00684-SCT (denying cert)

Durr v. State, 2021-CT-01109-SCT (granting cert)

Parker v. Canton Manor, 2022-CT-00206-SCT (denied cert)

Francis v. State, 2022-CA-00964-SCT (denying motion to dismiss appeal)

Wilson v. State, 2023-M-00633 (denying application for leave to file PCR motion, finding that the filing is frivolous, and warning that future frivolous filings may result in sanctions)

Hand Down Page