Mississippi Court of Appeals Decisions of January 23, 2024

The Mississippi Court of Appeals handed down nine opinions on Tuesday. There is a workers’ comp case, a homeowner v. HOA dispute with a robust discussion of Robert’s Rules of Order, a personal injury appeal after an underwhelming verdict for the plaintiff with some significant discovery/evidentiary rulings, a tortious interference case stemming from a grocery wholesaler’s default on financial obligations, three direct criminal appeals, and a couple of PCR cases.


Kirby v. State, 2022-KA-00320-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of first-degree murder and two counts of possession of a weapon by a felon, holding that the defendant failed to show that his trial counsel was ineffective, that the court did not abuse its discretion by limiting cross-examination of a rebuttal witness for the State, and that the verdict was supported by sufficient evidence.
(10-0)


Harris v. State, 2022-KA-00647-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of touching a child for lustful purposes as an authority figure, holding that the circuit court did not commit reversible error by admitting a video recording of the defendant’s police interview after the detective had already testified about the interview, holding that the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict, and declining to address the ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim on direct appeal.
(10-0)


Buena Vista Lakes Maintenance Ass’n, Inc. v. Jones, 2022-CA-01153-COA (Civil – HOA)
Reversing the chancery court’s decision in a homeowner v. HOA dispute over the interpretation of bylaws, holding that the bylaws were not ambiguous and that a two-thirds majority of eligible votes cast at the meeting was required as opposed to two-third majority of those eligible to vote and holding that the chancellor erred in finding that the HOA’s bad on rental properties was against public policy.
(10-0)

NOTE – Robert’s Rules of Order had a moment here.


Divinity v. Hinds Cty Sch. Dist., 2022-WC-01282-COA (Civil – Workers’ Comp)
Affirming the MWCC’s decision after a hearing on the merits, holding that there was substantial evidence to support the Commission’s finding that the claimant’s upper extremity complaints were not among the injuries she sustained in her work-related accident and that the Employer/Carrier was not required to pay for a spinal cord stimulator and certain prescriptions.
(9-0: Carlton did not participate)

NOTE – This was a pro se appeal and the procedural history was convoluted.


Boyett v. State, 2022-CP-01239-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming the circuit court’s denial of a motion for PCR, holding that the motion was time-barred.
(10-0)


Duncan v. State, 2023-CP-00406-COA (Civil – PCR)
Affirming denial of motion for PCR, holding that the circuit court did not err in finding the PCR motion moot because the petitioner had been released on parole.
(10-0)


Harris v. Ratcliff, 2022-CA-00596-COA (Civil – Personal Injury)
Affirming the trial court’s denial of the plaintiff’s motion for new trial or additur after the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff in an amount significantly less than the plaintiff’s claimed medical expenses, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting the defendant’s additional time to designate experts, in striking one of the plaintiff’s experts at trial after the expert began testifying based on notes that had not been disclosed (to the surprise of both sides), in denying the plaintiff’s request to substitute an expert for another expert who was in a coma where the plaintiff was prepared to use the expert’s video testimony at trial, or in excluding a DTI brain scan.
(7-2: Westbrooks and McDonald concurred in part and dissented in part; McCarty did not participate)


Edwards v. State, 2022-KA-00719-COA (Criminal – Felony)
Affirming conviction of attempted capital murder of a chancery court judge, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by allowing testimony from two law enforcement officers regarding information they received during their investigation because it was offered for purposes other than to prove the truth of the matter asserted.
(9-1-0: Lawrence concurred in part and in the result without separate written opinion)


Silver Dollar Sales, Inc. v. Battah, 2022-CA-00476-COA (Civil – Torts)
Affirming the trial court’s grant of a directed verdict in favor of one defendant in a case stemming from a grocery wholesaler’s default on its debts to a financing company, holding that the plaintiff failed to prove that one defendant (another grocery wholesaler) committed tortious interference with business relations or that anything that defendant did proximately caused actual damages to the plaintiff.
(8-2: McDonald dissented, joined by Westbrooks)


Other Orders

In the Matter of the Guardianship of B.P.: Michael P. v. Patrick Thomas and Jennifer Thomas, 2021-CA-01288-COA (denying rehearing)

Tubwell v. FV-1, Inc., 2021-CP-01345-COA (denying rehearing)

Washington v. State, 2021-KA-01384-COA (denying rehearing)

Ramsey v. State, 2022-CP-00103-COA (denying rehearing)

Prophet v. State, 2022-CA-00933-COA (denying rehearing)

Hall v. State, 2022-CP-01097-COA (denying rehearing)


Hand Down Page