Justia Criminal Law Opinion Summaries

The issue before the Supreme Court was whether the Court had the right, authority, and power to declare itself superior to and above both the other two branches of government in all matters of constitutional compliance. Attorney General Jim Hood asked the judicial branch of government to void several pardons, alleging that the applicants failed to publish notice as required by Section 124 of the Mississippi Constitution. After the Court received this appeal, Governor Barbour (who issued the pardons) submitted an amicus curiae brief, and the Court allowed his counsel to participate in oral argument. At oral argument, the Court asked Attorney General Hood to point out any pardon that was not facially valid, and he could not. The Court noted that the parties and Governor Barbour presented numerous issues for consideration, including: whether those who did not apply for a pardon were required to publish notice; whether the governor(and not the convicted felons) applied for some of the pardons; whether some of the pardons had any applicant at all; whether the publication provision requires four or five weekly publications; whether the governor, the attorney general, or the pardonees have the burden of proof; and whether the attorney general is estopped from objecting to the pardons. "No judicial duty is more central to the proper operation of our system of government than is [the Court's] duty to decide this issue correctly. . . . [the Court was] compelled to hold that – in each of the cases before us – it fell to the governor alone to decide whether the Constitution’s publication requirement was met."

Defendant Kevin Dale McCain was convicted of robbery. On writ of certiorari, the Supreme Court addressed the permissibility vel non of a post-conviction amendment of Defendant's indictment to include habitual-offender status. In 2011, the Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction and sentence. Two days later, the Supreme Court's mandate issued in "Gowdy v. Mississippi," (56 S.3d 540 (Miss. 2011)), which held that a a post-conviction amendment of an indictment to include habitual-offender status "was prohibited[,]"such that the “enhanced portion” of Gowdy's sentence was vacated and his case was remanded for resentencing. Defendant's Motion for Rehearing on appeal contended that "Gowdy should apply to this case" and requested that the Court of Appeals "vacate [his] sentence and . . . have him resentenced under [Section] 97-3-73." The Court of Appeals denied Defendant's motion. Upon review, the Supreme Court held that in considering a post-conviction amendment of an indictment to include habitual offender status, the requirements of "a fair opportunity to present a defense" and no "unfai[r] surprise" are assessed on a case-by-case basis. In Defendant's case, both requirements were satisfied. The Court therefore affirmed Defendant's conviction for robbery and sentence of life as a habitual offender in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections, without eligibility for parole or probation.

Defendant William Matthew Wilson was indicted in a multiple-count indictment for capital murder with the underlying felony of child abuse and for a separate count of felonious child abuse. He pled guilty to capital murder and to the separate child-abuse count. Defendant purportedly waived a sentencing hearing before a jury. He was sentenced to death for capital murder and to twenty years for felonious child abuse. The Supreme Court affirmed Defendant's death sentence, with the mandate issuing on December 10, 2009. Defendant timely filed his motion seeking post-conviction collateral relief. The Attorney General filed a response, and Defendant filed a reply to that response. Upon review of the claims raised, the Supreme Court found that Defendant established that he is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on certain grounds; therefore, his PCR motion is granted in part and denied in part.

Defendant Dennis Jerome Beal allegedly offered Lieutenant Tommy Jones, a Madison County Sheriff’s Department deputy, $10,000 in hopes that Jones could make Defendant's pending drug charge disappear. On April 28, 2010, Defendant was indicted by grand jury for bribery as a habitual offender. A Madison County jury unanimously found Defendant guilty of bribing Jones, and the trial court sentenced him to ten years in prison as a nonviolent habitual offender. Defendant appealed. Upon review of the trial court record, the Supreme Court found that the trial court properly permitted the State to amend Defendant's indictment before trial. Nevertheless, the trial court committed prejudicial error regarding admission of a videotape, as it became relevant to the case once the State opened the door by eliciting testimony about its contents. The Court found that Defendant's arguments regarding opening and closing statements and entrapment were without merit. Therefore, Defendant's conviction and sentence were reversed, and this case was remanded for a new trial.

On September 17, 2008, Defendant Joshua King and Terrance Stanton were indicted for two counts of capital murder. Defendant's first trial ended in a mistrial in July 2009. In 2010, Defendant was retried in the Circuit Court of Bolivar County for the deaths of Alfred Quong and So Ha Jung during the commission of a robbery. The jury found Defendant guilty on both counts. The trial court sentenced Defendant to life in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections (MDOC) and ordered that his sentences run concurrently. Defendant appealed his conviction. Finding no error, the Supreme Court found that the jury verdict and life sentence in the custody of the MDOC should have been affirmed.

Defendant Jermell Victory was convicted for the murder of Darron Sykes and for possession of a firearm as a convicted felon. The circuit court sentenced Defendant, respectively, to life and ten years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections (MDOC), with the sentences to run consecutively. Defendant raised one issue on appeal: "whether the trial court erred in refusing to grant appellant Jermell Victory's proposed jury instruction on eyewitness identification where said instruction embodied his theory of the case." Upon review of that instruction, the Supreme Court found that the circuit court did not err by denying Defendant's proposed jury instruction.

In 2009, Defendant Michael Kelly was charged with reckless driving, found guilty, and fined $114. Arising out of these same facts, a grand jury handed down a two-count indictment against Defendant several months later: count I charged Defendant with the aggravated assault of Tiffany Walker (by hitting Walker while driving his truck); count II charged Defendant with felony malicious mischief for the destruction of an outdoor ice machine. Defendant moved for dismissal of his indictment, asserting his double-jeopardy rights. The trial court denied his motion. Aggrieved, Defendant filed a Petition for Permission to Appeal from an Interlocutory Order with the Supreme Court. A three-justice panel of the Court granted Defendant's petition to assess his double jeopardy claim. Finding that reckless driving was not a lesser-included offense of aggravated assault for double-jeopardy purposes: "[t]o prove reckless driving, it is not necessary to prove the elements of injury or attempt to injure. Since each of these charges contains separate elements, the prosecution of [Defendant] for aggravated assault does not violate his double-jeopardy rights, and that contention is without merit."

Defendant Arturo Aquirre Moreno filed a motion to proceed in the trial court with his third petition for post-conviction relief. The Supreme Court granted him leave to proceed solely on the issue of ineffective assistance of counsel, and the trial court held a hearing only on that issue. The Court concluded that it improperly exercised authority to consider Defendant's motion and thus should not have remanded for an evidentiary hearing. Notwithstanding its own error, the Court affirmed the trial court's denial of relief to Defendant on his ineffective assistance of counsel claim: "[t]o reverse based on the procedural error would be futile, as the result is the same: the trial court was the first (and therefore proper court) to pass on the merits of that claim." Further complicating the issues in this case, Defendant also raised double jeopardy and venue claims for the first time on appeal. The Court of Appeals addressed all of Defendant's claims and denied him relief. The Supreme Court found that the appellate court erroneously considered Defendant's double jeopardy and venue claims. The Supreme Court declined review of Defendant's claims.

Defendant Frederick Watts was convicted of felony fleeing or eluding a law enforcement officer in a motor vehicle and was sentenced to five years in custody, with two years suspended and three years of post-release supervision. On appeal, he argued that his conviction for felony fleeing subjected him to double jeopardy, because he previously had pled guilty to reckless driving in the Lauderdale County Justice Court. He also argued that the evidence was insufficient to support a guilty verdict. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court affirmed Defendant’s conviction and sentence.

Defendant Damien Anderson (also known as Damien Wise) was convicted of murder arising from the homicide of Darnell “Sporty” Smith. Defendant contended the circuit court erred when it refused to grant a jury instruction on the lesser-included offense of manslaughter. He stated that the trial court improperly forced the defense to choose between manslaughter and self-defense instructions. However, because no reasonable jury could have found the defendant guilty of the lesser-included offense, the Supreme Court found no error and affirmed the circuit court’s judgment.