Tag: Mississippi Court of Appeals

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of September 26, 2023

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down nine opinions today. There is something for everyone: tort, real property, divorce, direct criminal appeals, and PCR. Due to volume of paying work and COA output I had to move quickly to get these out, so I expect a higher-than-normal rate of typos.

Odom v. State, 2021-KA-00676-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of murder, holding that computer printouts of GPS and location data from Google were not properly authenticated and should not have been admitted but that the error was harmless, that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting photos of a vehicle over an authentication objection, that the trial court did not err in excluding paint-transfer evidence and crime lab documents for lack of authenticity, and holding that the conviction was supported by sufficient evidence.
(7-3: Wilson dissented without written opinion; Westbrooks dissented, joined in part by McDonald)

Practice Point – On the authenticity of Google satellite images, the Court noted that the images themselves were not hearsay, but that computer-generated data included on the photos required authentication:

Robb v. McLaughlin, 2021-CA-00672-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming a judgment after jury trial in a negligence/infliction of emotional distress/invasion of privacy/defamation/libel case stemming from the defendant posting a false ad for prostitution online with the plaintiff’s phone number, holding that the defendant’s due process rights were not violated, the proceedings were properly bifurcated into compensatory and punitive phases, the plaintiff was not required to produced expert medical testimony on her intentional infliction of emotional distress claim, the damages were not speculative, and the jury instructions were appropriate.
(9-1-0: Wilson concurred in part and in the result without written opinion.)

Practice Point– I have cited the 5th Circuit’s Krieser decisions for the proposition that settlement as to one defendant does not affect apportionment at trial–a proposition that can cut either way. It is nice to have a Mississippi Court of Appeals decision to cite (citing Krieser) for this proposition.

Alexander v. State, 2022-CA-00397-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of PCR motion that argued ineffective assistance of counsel, holding that the circuit court’s decision was not clearly erroneous, legally in error, or an abuse of discretion.
(9-1-0: Westbrooks concurred in result only without written opinion)

Bradshaw v. State, 2022-KA-00469-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of sexual battery, holding that the indictment was not overly broad to the point it failed to provide sufficient notice under a plain error analysis or on the merits, that there was no violation of the right to speedy trial, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing testimony of prior bad acts because it complied with Rule 404(b).
(9-0: Emfinger did not participate.)

Smith v. State, 2022-KA-00664-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of sexual battery of a child, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying the defendant’s motion for continuance because the State’s discovery violations did not result in manifest injustice, that the trial court did not commit plain error by severing the codefendant’s case without a proper motion, and that the lack of error precluded reversal for cumulative error.
(10-0)

Titus v. Stelzer, 2022-CA-01079-COA (Civil – Real Property)
Affirming the chancellor’s order in a suit to set aside a quitclaim deed and to confirm and quiet title, holding that the chancellor did not err in setting aside the quitclaim deed and confirming title through a prior conveyance.
(9-1-0: McCarty concurred in part and in the result without written opinion.)

Gregg v. State, 2022-KA-00485-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of possession of amphetamine and marijuana, holding that the sole issue on appeal–ineffective assistance of counsel–should be dismissed without prejudice because the record was insufficient to address the issue on direct appeal.
(10-0)

Patel v. State, 2022-CA-00985-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of motion to withdraw and vacate a prior admission of guilt in a pretrial intervention after the petitioner learned that even with dismissal and expungement he was not eligible for lawful permanent residence status under the INA, holding that the circuit court properly dismissed the motion for lack of jurisdiction.
(9-0: Emfinger did not participate.)

Gussio v. Gussio, 2020-CA-00785-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming the chancellor’s judgment in a divorce case granting the mother a divorce and granting her physical and legal custody of the children, holding that the chancellor did not err in the amount of child support awarded, in not imputing income to the mother, in awarding alimony, by denying the father’s motion in limine to exclude evidence of the mother’s attorney’s fees, in awarding attorney’s fees, or in denying motion to alter or amend the judgment and consider new evidence.
(5-5: Wilson concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by Greenlee, Lawrence, Smith, and Emfinger.)

NOTE – Judge Wilson’s partial dissent agreed with the rulings on child support and alimony, but asserted that the award of attorneys’ fees should not be affirmed because the record and the chancellor’s findings on attorneys’ fees were insufficient. I am putting this one on my cert watchlist.

Other Orders

Lynn v. State, 2021-KA-00968-COA (denying rehearing)

Culver v. Culver, 2021-CA-01108-COA (denying rehearing)

Stevenson v. State, 2021-KA-01286-COA (recalling mandate)

Lestrick v. State, 2021-CP-01409-COA (denying motion for additional time to file motion for rehearing)

Covin v. Covin, 2022-COA-00019-COA (denying motion for appellate attorney’s fees)

Amos v. State, 2022-KA-00171-COA (denying motion for enlargement of time to file motion for rehearing)

Pickle v. State, 2022-CP-00929-COA (recalling mandate)

Rehabilitation Centers, Inc. v. Williams, 2023-WC-00453-COA (granting motion to dismiss consolidated appeals as interlocutory)

Miller v. State, 2023-TS-00812-COA (allowing appeal to proceed as timely)

Gardner v. State, 2023-TS-00903-COA (granting motion to consolidate)

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 Court of Appeals Decisions of August 29, 2023

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down six opinions today. Today was heavy on direct criminal appeals, with one reversal in part. There was also an appeal of summary judgment in a slip-and-fall case and a PCR case.

Gilbert v. State, 2021-KA-01265-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of leaving the scene of an accident causing significant bodily injury, aggravated DUI, and DUI-related death of an unborn child, holding that the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was without merit and that the prosecution did not improperly draw attention to the defendant’s exercise of his right to remain silent during closing arguments.
(10-0)

Landry v. Vallman McComb Mall, LLC, 2022-CA-00439-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming summary judgment in favor of a fast food restaurant in a slip-and-fall case, holding that mopping and cleaning floors in a restaurant was a reasonable endeavor and was conducted in a reasonable manner, and that the an employee provided multiple warnings.
(9-1-0: McCarty concurred in part and in the result sub silentio.)

Lee v. State, 2022-KA-00078-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming in part and reversing in part after the defendant was convicted of first degree murder, two counts of felon in possession of firearm, and tampering with physical evidence, holding (1) that the two counts of felon in possession should be merged into a single count and remanding for sentencing, (2) that excluding language from the tampering instruction that removed the element requiring intent was plain error, and (3) that retroactive misjoinder was inapplicable.
(9-1-0: Barnes concurred in part and in the result sub silentio.)

NOTE – Here is the jury instruction at issue:

Washington v. State, 2021-KA-01384-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming convictions of first-degree murder and two counts of aggravated assault, holding that the trial court’s ruling on the defendant’s Batson challenges were not clearly erroneous or against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
(8-1*-0: Westbrooks wrote a special concurrence, joined by McDonald and joined in part by McCarty; Smith did not participate. *McDonald and McCarty joined the majority opinion and the special concurrence.)

Ellison v. State, 2022-KA-00462-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of capital murder, holding that the verdict was not against the overwhelming evidence and that the trial court did not err by not removing a sleeping juror where the issue was not raised by trial counsel, and dismissing the ineffective assistance claim without prejudice.
(9-0: Smith did not participate.)

Hall v. State, 2022-CP-01097-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming the dismissal of a PCR motion, holding that the motions were filed outside of the three-year statute of limitations and the petitioner did not prove that a statutory exception applied.
(7-3*-0: Westbrooks wrote a special concurrence joined by McDonald, and joined in party by Barnes and McCarty; Barnes and McDonald concurred in part and in the result sub silentio. *McCarty authored the majority opinion and joined the special concurrence.)

Other Orders

Miller v. Board of Trustees of Second Baptist Church of Starkville, 2020-CA-01384-COA (denying rehearing)

Williamson v. State, 2021-KA-00830-COA (denying rehearing)

Durr v. State, 2021-KA-01109-COA (denying rehearing)

Herbert v. Herbert, 2021-CA-01291-COA (denying rehearing)

Beckworth v. Beckworth, 2022-CA-00048-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of August 22, 2023

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down five opinions today. There are two direct criminal appeals, two custody cases, and a real property case deciding the parties’ respective rights to a common wall that gave me bar exam flashbacks.

In the Matter of the Guardianship of B.P., 2021-CA-01288-COA (Civil – Custody)
Affirming the chancellor’s order in a custody matter, holding that the chancellor did not err in finding that the child’s appointed guardians successfully rebutted the natural parent presumption and that it was in the child’s best interest to remain in the guardians’ custody.
(8-1-1: No separate opinions. Westbrooks concurred in the result only and McDonald concurred in part and dissented in part without separate written opinion.)

Ndicu v. Gacheri, 2022-CA-00415-COA (Civil – Custody)
Affirming the chancellor’s judgment in a custody matter, holding that the chancellor did not manifestly abuse his discretion by denying the father’s request for past child support and education expenses.
(10-0)

Kelly v. State, 2022-KA-00577-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of capital murder, holding that the circuit court did not err in denying the defendant’s motion for new trial based on an allegation that a juror misrepresented her lack of familial relationship with the victim where the claimed familial relationship was not supported by credible evidentiary support and, even if there was a familial relationship, there was no evidence the juror knew about it when she said she was not related to the defendant.
(8-1-1: No separate opinions. Westbrooks concurred in result only; McDonald dissented.)

NOTE – The alleged familial relationship surfaced when a member of the defendant’s family sent the juror in question a Facebook message:

LIFE TIP – Do not message jurors.

Alford v. Cotton Row Hospitality, LLC, 2022-CA-00125-COA (Civil – Real Property)
Affirming in part and reversing in part on direct appeal and cross-appeal in a case about a common wall between two properties in a downtown area, holding that Side A of the wall had established a prescriptive easement for the use of the wall but did not obtain an ownership interest by adverse possession of the wall that was located on Side B’s property and included in Side B’s deed, that there was no equitable need for Side B to sell the wall to Side A, and that Side A did not have to reimburse Side B for its expense in supporting the wall Side B incurred after tearing down the other three walls of Side B’s property.
(10-0)

NOTE – This opinion also discusses the doctrine of unclean hands (it did not apply) and the adequacy of pleading the prescriptive easement claim (it was adequate).

Smith v. State, 2020-KA-00774-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of assault and possession of a firearm by a felon, holding that the trial court committed harmless error (i.e. not plain error) by giving a pre-arming jury instruction that was not objected to, that the evidence was sufficient to establish the defendant’s identity, that the trial court did not err in giving a flight instruction where the defendant did not provide an independent and uncontradicted reason for his flight, and that the defendant’s trial counsel was not ineffective.
(8-2: Emfinger dissented, joined by Wilson.)

NOTE – The dissent’s position is that the defendant’s appeal of his conviction and sentence was not properly before the court:

Other Orders

Friley v. State, 2021-KA-00791-COA (granting pro se motion for time for rehearing motion)

Renfroe v. Parker, 2021-CA-01048-COA (denying rehearing)

McFarland v. State, 2021-CA-01311-COA (denying rehearing)

Everett v. State, 2021-CP-2021 (denying rehearing)

Fagan v. Faulkner, 2022-CA-00130-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of August 8, 2023

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down ten opinions today. There are a bunch of domestic relations cases, several direct criminal appeals (with some jury instruction issues), a workers’ comp decision addressing the compensability of a COVID diagnosis, and a real property case. I learned about the “fugitive dismissal rule” today and you can too.

Covin v. Covin, 2022-CA-00019-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming the chancellor’s decision finding both parties to a divorce in contempt and denying both parties’ request for attorney’s fees, holding that the chancellor did not err in making a sua sponte clarification of final judgment of divorce, in finding one side in contempt for failing to refinance the marital home and remit the other side’s equitable interest within the court-ordered timeline and for not allowing the other side to retrieve personal property, or in not awarding attorney’s fees despite contempt findings.
(9-1-0: Lawrence concurred in part and in the result sub silentio.)

Carpenter v. State, 2022-KA-00398-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction or attempted murder and possession of a firearm by a felon, holding that it was not plain error to not instruct the jury on the elements of murder and that the instruction give adequately described the crime of attempted murder.
(7-3-0: Wilson and McDonald concurred in part and in the result sub silentio; Westbrooks concurred in the result only sub silentio.)

NOTE – Here are the instructions at issue. S-1 read:

And S-2 read:

White v. State, 2021-KA-00818-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming convictions of jointly-tried defendants for drive-by shooting and shooting into a swelling, holding that the convictions were supported by sufficient evidence and that the verdicts were not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
(10-0)

Davis v. State, 2022-KA-00573-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction for armed robbery with sentence enhancement based on the victim’s age, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a motion for new trial based on weight of the evidence arguments or in refusing to give a lesser-included-offense instruction for simple assault.
(10-0)

Gardner v. State, 2021-KA-00886-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming convictions of first-degree murder and attempted murder, holding that the trial court did not err by not striking a jail minister for cause or by finding a child competent to testify, that the issue of limitations put on on cross-examination were waived for failure to object, and that there was no plain error in accepting the State’s jury instruction that did not contain the word “deliberate.”
(6-4-0: Wilson and Emfinger concurred in part and in the result sub silentio; Greenlee and Lawrence concurred in result only sub silentio.)

NOTE – Here is the jury instruction at issue:

Davidson v. Davidson, 2022-CA-00372-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming in part and reversing in part the chancellor’s decision related to property and debt division in a divorce proceeding, holding that the chancellor did not err in classification of marital assets or award of equity in the marital home but the order dividing the debt incurred on a credit card was not sufficiently clear regarding the amount to divide and remanding for a proper finding as to the amount.
(9-1-0: Greenlee concurred in result only sub silentio.)

Jones v. State, 2021-KA-01375-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of second-degree murder, holding that the verdict was not contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence and that the trial court did not err in refusing a jury instruction on the excuse of accident where the defendant never stated he accidentally fired the gun.
(9-1-0: Westbrooks concurred in part and in the result sub silentio.)

West v. The Nichols Center, 2021-WC-01403-COA (Civil – Workers’ Comp)
Affirming the Commission’s finding that a nurse’s COVID diagnosis and resulting blood clot after treating COVID-positive patients was not compensable, holding that there was no lay or medical proof that the claimant contracted COVID at work.
(10-0)

PRACTICE POINT – For those of us who handle workers’ comp claims, this was an interesting footnote regarding the necessity of medical proof. I was anticipating a discussion of whether COVID falls under the statutory definition of an “accidental injury” or an “occupational disease” but this footnote explains why we didn’t get it.

Gillen v. Gillen, 2021-CA-00837-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Dismissing appeal of a contempt order in a divorce proceeding, holding that the party in contempt under the “fugitive dismissal rule” because he had absented himself from the chancery court’s jurisdiction to avoid incarceration for contempt.
(10-0)

PRACTICE POINT – Be sure to add the “fugitive dismissal rule” to your arsenal:

Tubwell v. FV-1, 2021-CP-01345-COA (Civil – Real Property)
Affirming the circuit court’s decision dispossessing the defendant of land he refused to vacate after the property was foreclosed on, holding that the circuit court had jurisdiction, that the circuit court did not err in denying the defendant’s motion to dismiss based on the statute of limitations and adverse possession, that the plaintiff was entitled to summary judgment on the issue of the defendant’s failure to vacate the property, and that the circuit court did not err in dismissing the counterclaim without prejudice.
(3-2-5: McCarty concurred in part/in result sub silentio; Carlton concurred in result only sub silentio; Barnes, Westbrooks, McDonald, and Emfinger concurred in part/dissented in part sub silentio; Wilson concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by Barnes, and Emfinger, and joined in part by Westbrooks, McDonald, and McCarty.)

Other Orders

Lofton v. Lofton, 2021-CT-00035-COA (granting motion for supplemental attorney’s fees)

Brown v. Brown, 2021-CA-00728-COA (dismissing pro se motions for lack of jurisdiction)

Nunn v. State, 2021-KA-01371-COA (denying rehearing)

Brown v. State, 2022-CP-00069-COA (recalling mandate and granting additional rehearing time)

Hamilton v. State, 2022-CP-00069-COA (granting pro se motion for extension of time to file motion for rehearing)

Parker v. MDH, 2022-WC-00552-COA (denying rehearing)

Wells v. State, 2022-KA-00707-COA (granting motion to recall mandate and reinstate appeal)

Fox v. State, 2022-KA-00988-COA (granting motion for leave to file amicus brief)

Pryer v. State, 2023-TS-00568-COA (denying motion for reconsideration)

Hand Down List

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of August 1, 2023

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down six opinions today. We have a couple of state boards and agencies decisions, one dealing with recall of a police officer’s certification and the other with a termination of a teacher and suspension of license. There is a real property case involving a church and the invocation of the “ecclesiastical abstention doctrine,” a direct criminal appeal, and two PCR cases.

As a housekeeping note, I have started writing “sub silentio” instead of “without separate written opinion” to indicate concurrences and dissents without separate written opinions. I am not aware of that phrase being used in that specific manner, but I think it gets the point across. This may not seem like a big deal, and it really isn’t, but the frequency with which I have been typing “without separate written opinion” has become a thief of joy for this humble blogger of case summaries.

Walters v. Board on Law Enforcement Officer Standards and Training, 2022-SA-00378-COA (Civil – State Boards and Agencies)
Affirming the chancery court’s decision affirming Board’s decision to recall a police officer’s processional certification, holding that the Board’s decision was not arbitrary and capricious, did not violate the former officer’s constitutional rights, and were supported by substantial evidence including evidence of unnecessary force, violations of department policies, and racist text messages.
(10-0)

NOTE– The Court also granted in part a motion from the Board to unseal the case file.

Pickle v. State, 2022-CP-00929-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming the circuit court’s decision denying a motion to vacate a sentence for capital murder while committing criminal rape from 1978, holding that the petitioner was not illegally sentenced and that he was not entitled to a Miller resentencing hearing.
(8-2-0: Emfinger concurred in part and in the result sub silentio; Lawrence concurred in the result only sub silentio.)

Greater New Hamilton Grove Baptist Church v. Hamilton Grove Missionary Baptist Church, 2022-CA-00518-COA (Civil – Real Property)
Affirming the chancellor’s ruling that a deed purporting to convey real property owned by a church was invalid because it was not authorized by a resolution under section 79-11-31(1), holding that the chancellor was not deprived of subject matter jurisdiction under the “ecclesiastical abstention doctrine,” that the “minutes rule” was not applicable because a church is not a public board, and the chancellor did not abuse her discretion in granting the plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint.
(10-0)

NOTE – I thought the Court’s summary of its decision on the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine was interesting:

Badger v. State, 2022-CP-00831-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of the petitioner’s third motion for PCR twelve years after pleading guilty, holding that the circuit court did not err in finding that the motion was time-barred and did not meet any statutory exception under the UPCCRA or any fundamental rights exception that was in effect at that time.
(8-2-0: Westbrooks concurred in result only sub silentio.)

Langley v. Miss. State Board of Education, 2022-SA-01024-COA (Civil – State Board and Agencies)
Affirming the BOE’s decision upholding a teacher’s termination for violations of the BOE’s standards of conduct, suspending her license for five years, and placing conditions on reinstatement, holding that the Commission’s decision as upheld by the Board and the chancery court was supported by substantial evidence and was not arbitrary or capricious, the Commission was authorized to suspect her license, and she was afforded due process at her hearing.
(10-0)

West v. State, 2022-KA-00432-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of sexual battery and gratification of lust, both while in position of trust and authority, holding that the defendant’s sufficiency of the evidence argument was procedurally barred because it was not raised before the circuit court and that the circuit court did not commit plain error in not sua sponte declaring a mistrial.
(5-3-2: Barnes, McDonald, and Emfinger concurred in part and in the result sub silentio; Greenlee concurred in part and dissented in part sub silentio; Westbrooks concurred in part and dissented in part, joined by McDonald and Greenlee in part)

Other Orders

Wakefield v. State, 2021-KA-00187-COA (denying rehearing)

Estate of Bell v. Estate of Bell, 2021-CA-00789-COA (denying rehearing)

Anderson v. State, 2021-KA-01340-COA (denying rehearing)

McDowell v. State, 2021-CA-01381-COA (denying rehearing)

Everett v. State, 2021-CP-01415-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of July 25, 2023

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down five opinions today covering diverse subject matter. There is a zoning exception case, a custody case, a personal injury case considering a grant of summary judgment in a slip-and-fall case, a marital property division case analyzing whether a PSA was ambiguous, and a PCR case with a concurrence discussing Howell/Rowland I/Rowland II.

Keenum v. City of Moss Point, 2021-CA-01044-COA (Civil – Other/Zoning)
Reversing the circuit court’s decision that affirmed the mayor’s decision to approve a special exception to a zoning ordinance, holding that the decision to allow a for-profit development in a residential-zoned area under an exception for “semi-public recreational area” (which was not defined in the ordinance) was reversible error because that reading would render the prohibition against “commercial use” in the ordinance meaningless.
(8-1-0: McDonald concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Lawrence did not participate.)

D.W.K. v. Youth Court of Lincoln County, 2019-CP-00451-COA; 2020-CP-01307-COA (Civil – Custody)
Affirming the youth court’s denial of motions to consider new evidence two years after adjudication of abuse and neglect and placement of five minor children with their maternal aunt, holding that the youth court had jurisdiction; service of process was proper; that the youth court’s decision was not manifestly wrong or erroneous, was based on substantial evidence, and favored the best interest of the children; and that the record on appeal was sufficient.
(10-0)

Babin v. Wendelta, Inc., 2022-CA-00341-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Reversing the circuit court’s grant of summary judgment for a fast food restaurant in a slip-and-fall case, holding that “the record contained ample proof” of a dangerous condition where multiple witnesses including restaurant employees testified that the mat was slippery on the date of the fall and that the vestibule where the mat was located held condensation.
(9-1-0: Lawrence concurred in result only WOSWO.)

Practice Point – I have noticed ANSI standards appearing more frequently in my practice. I suspect these two sentences will make their way into more than one brief:

Blanchard v. Blanchard, 2022-CA-00356-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Reversing the chancery court’s ruling based on parol evidence after finding that a Property Settlement Agreement was ambiguous, holding that the PSA was unambiguous and that it entitled the ex-husband to half of the net proceeds of the sale of the former marital home even though the ex-wife had refinanced the home.
(10-0)

Roberson v. State, 2021-CA-01182-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming order granting in part and denying in part a PCR motion, holding that the petitioner was not entitled to an exception from the statutory bars and that, in any event, there was no merit to his claim that his plea was involuntary or that his counsel was ineffective.
(6-4-0: Westbrooks, McDonald, and McCarty concurred in part and in the result WOSWO; Wilson concurred in part and in the result, joined by McDonald and McCarty and joined in part by Westbrooks.)

Note – Judge Wilson’s concurrence discussed the state of the “fundamental-rights exception” in light of the Mississippi Supreme Court in Howell overruling Rowland I and Rowland II, and noted that the Supreme Court had not squarely addressed whether the successive motions bar is substantive or procedural:

Other Orders

Buchanan v. State, 2021-CP-01069-COA (denying rehearing)

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of July 18, 2023

I am declaring an end to the hiatus caused by the tree falling on my house. That war rages on, but these decisions are not going to summarize themselves. I aspire to go back and summarize the decisions handed down while I was down, but I am going to prioritize summarizing new hand downs going forward.

On Tuesday, the Court of Appeals handed down four opinions. One is an appeal of a verdict in a med mal bench trial. The other three are PCR cases, one of which yielded a 5-1-4 split.

Singing River Health System v. Brand, 2022-CA-00090-COA (Civil – Med Mal)
Affirming judgment for the plaintiff in a med mal case against a hospital after a bench trial, holding that the hospital’s vicarious liability argument was procedurally barred because it not raised at the trial court level, that the plaintiff’s experts were qualified to testify about a breach of the standard of care and cause of death and provided sufficient evidence under the “lost chance of recovery” theory, and that there was substantial evidence to support the trial court’s findings.
(8-1-0: Wilson concurred in result only; Lawrence did not participate.)

Tate v. State, 2021-CP-01237-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of PCR motion, holding that the trial court did not err determining that there was no evidence showing that the plea of guilt was involuntary or that counsel was ineffective.
(9-0: Emfinger did not participate.)

Havercome v. State, 2022-CA-00391-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming dismissal of PCR motion, holding that the motion was barred by the UPCCRA.
(10-0)

Love v. State, 2021-CP-01101-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming dismissal of motion for PCR, holding that the trial court did not err in finding that there was a factual basis for his plea, that the please was voluntary, that the claim to withdraw his plea was time-barred, and that counsel was not ineffective.
(5-1-4: McDonald concurred in part and in the result without written opinion; Emfinger dissented, joined by Wilson, Westbrooks, and McCarty, and joined in part by McDonald.)

Other Orders

Alford v. State, 2022-KA-00025-COA (denying rehearing)

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

Hand Down Page

Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of June 13, 2023

I was out of town for a wedding anniversary trip on Tuesday, and then I have been playing catch-up at the office to recover from said trip, so my summaries are delayed this week. First up is Tuesday’s offering from Mississippi Court of Appeals. The COA handed down five opinions this week: a termination of parental rights case, an emancipation case, two direct criminal appeals, and an attempted appeal of a MDOC decision.

Rogers v. Kresse, 2021-CA-00914-COA (Civil – Custody)
Affirming termination of parental rights, holding that the chancery court did not err in finding that the natural mother had abandoned her children and that the father had not abused his discretion with regard to visitation by disallowing it, and that reunification was not in the children’s best interest.
(7-2-0: McDonald concurred in part in and the result without separate written opinion; Westbrooks concurred in result only without separate written opinion.)

Talley v. Talley, 2022-CA-00005-COA (Civil – Domestic Relations)
Affirming the chancellor’s judgment in an emancipation proceeding initiated by a father with a counter-petition for contempt for failure to pay filed by the mother, holding that the chancellor did not err by finding that the children were emancipated while not modifying the life insurance provision of the divorce agreement, finding the father in contempt for failing to pay his portion of certain expenses, and awarding the mother attorney’s fees.
(9-0: Barnes did not participate.)

Allen v. State, 2022-KA-00331-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of selling fentanyl and trafficking and possession of controlled substances while possessing a firearm, holding that the circuit court did not err in admitting text messages into evidence on authentication, relevance, or hearsay grounds.
(7-3-0: Wilson concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion; Westbrooks and McDonald concurred in result only without separate written opinion.)

Wallace v. State, 2022-KA-00332-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first-degree murder, holding that the trial court did not err in denying the defendant’s request for a heat-of-passion manslaughter instruction or by allowing testimony related to injuries the victim suffered a week before her death.
(9-0: Smith did not participate.)

NOTE– I love it when opinions cut to the chase. Introductions like this would just about put me out of business around here:

Knight v. State, 2021-CP-01192-COA (Civil – State Boards & Agencies)
Dismissing an appeal for lack of jurisdiction, holding that the appeal of a purported PCR motion was untimely and because it was actually a petition seeking judicial review of an MDOC decision it was a civil appeal for which the Court could not suspend the rules to allow an untimely appeal.
(10-0)

Other Orders

McKenzie v. State, 2012-KA-00471-COA (dismissing untimely motion for rehearing)

Thomas v. State, 2021-CP-00060-COA (denying rehearing)

Pace v. State, 2022-KA-00046-COA (denying rehearing)

Jones v. State, 2023-TS-00325-COA (dismissing appeal as untimely)

Bates v. State, 2023-TS-00356-COA (allowing appeal to proceed as timely based on well-taken pro se show-cause response)

Hand Down Page