Justia Mississippi Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Eugene Bullen was convicted of driving under the influence (DUI), second offense. He appealed to the County Court of Madison County. Following a bench trial, the trial judge found Bullen guilty and sentenced him to thirty days of imprisonment, a two year’s driver’s license suspension, an alcohol and drug assessment, six months supervised probation, eighteen months unsupervised probation, and eighty hours of community service within six months. Aggrieved by that decision, Bullen appealed to the Madison County Circuit Court. The circuit court held that the decision of the county court was supported by substantial evidence and was not manifestly wrong. Bullen then appealed to the Mississippi Supreme Court, arguing the trial court erred by not granting his motion to dismiss for insufficiency of the evidence. Bullen argued the State did not meet its burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was intoxicated. After review, the Supreme Court held the trial judge was presented with sufficient evidence to find Bullen guilty of violating Mississippi Code Section 63-11-30(1)(a), and accordingly, affirmed. View "Bullen v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

In 2017, Shakeara Harris filed domestic violence charges against Joseph Eubanks. Eubanks was indicted for aggravated domestic violence in June 2017. He was later convicted of simple assault domestic violence in January 2020. Eubanks was sentenced to six months in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections, with six months suspended and 364 days of unsupervised probation. He appealed, raising seven contentions as grounds for appeal. Finding no reversible error however, the Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed Eubanks' conviction. View "Eubanks v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

The issue this case presented for the Mississippi Supreme Court's review centered on whether Allen Russell’s life sentence without the possibility of parole for possession of marijuana, as an habitual offender under Mississippi Code Section 99-19-83 (Rev. 2020), violates his Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. The Court of Appeals stalemated five to five, resulting in an affirmance of the trial court's judgment. The Supreme Court affirmed: "Based on both this Court’s precedent and the rulings of the United States Supreme Court in Rummel, 445 U.S. 263, Harmelin, 501 U.S. 263, Andrade, 538 U.S. 63, and Ewing, 538 U.S. 11, Russell’s sentence as an habitual offender was not grossly disproportionate. His sentence meets the prescribed statutory punishment. There is no legal basis to vacate Russell’s sentence. It is neither cruel nor unusual. As Russell has failed to prove that the threshold requirement of gross disproportionality was offered and met, because his sentence fell within the statutory requirement, and because his sentence is a constitutionally permissible sentence, we should affirm Russell’s conviction and sentence." View "Allen v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Kendall Magee pled guilty to second-degree murder and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. For his conviction of second-degree murder, Magee was sentenced to thirty-five years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections (MDOC), with ten years suspended and five years’ post-release supervision. For his conviction of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, Magee was sentenced to ten years in the custody of the MDOC, with ten years suspended and five years’ post-release supervision. The sentences were ordered to run consecutively. In his motion for post-conviction relief, Magee claimed his guilty plea was involuntary because: (1) his attorney was ineffective and misrepresented the consequences of the plea and sentence; (2) his attorney was ineffective and failed to properly investigate his case; and (3) the circuit judge coerced him into pleading guilty. Regarding his misrepresentation claim, Magee asserted his trial counsel “advised [him] to take the plea because he would only serve six to seven years in prison.” According to Magee, after he entered his guilty plea, he learned that he was not eligible for early release and “that his actual time to serve in prison would be 25 years.” The Mississippi Supreme Court concluded Magee was entitled to a second evidentiary hearing about “whether Magee was misinformed as to the consequences of his pleas of guilty and whether those pleas were given in reliance on the alleged misinformation.” The circuit court's judgment was reversed and the matter remanded for further proceedings. View "Magee v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

At issue in this interlocutory appeal was whether the circuit court had jurisdiction to hear defendant Rayvon Altman's case. In August 2020, Altman was indicted in on four counts of aggravated assault in violation of Mississippi Code Section 97-3-7(a)(1) (Rev. 2020). The indictment alleged that Altman intentionally drove his motor vehicle into another vehicle, which was occupied by four people, in an attempt to injure the occupants. It was subsequently acknowledged that the occupants of the other vehicle were Altman’s mother, siblings, and stepfather. In early 2021, Altman filed a motion to dismiss the indictment for lack of jurisdiction, arguing that the indictment should have been dismissed because the youth court had exclusive jurisdiction under Section 43-21-151 because he was under eighteen years of age at the time of the alleged offense. The Mississippi Supreme Court found both Altman and the State agreed that the deadly weapon exception was inapplicable because Section 97-37-1 did not prohibit the concealed carrying of an automobile. Thus, the circuit court did not have jurisdiction over Altman because he was a minor at the time the alleged offense was committed. The circuit court’s order was reversed and the case remanded to the circuit court for it to render a judgment dismissing Altman’s indictment and to “forward all documents pertaining to the cause to the youth court[.]” View "Altman v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Tony Clark was convicted by jury of capital murder, attempted murder, and possession of a firearm by a previously convicted felon. Clark was sentenced to death by lethal injection. After careful review of the record and Clark’s arguments, the Mississippi Supreme Court found no reversible error and affirmed the judgment of conviction. View "Clark v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

John Webb was convicted by jury on one count of fondling and three counts of sexual battery of two underage girls, one of whom was his live-in girlfriend’s daughter. On appeal, Webb asserted multiple evidentiary challenges against his convictions. After review, the Mississippi Supreme Court found the evidence “overwhelmingly favors the guilty verdicts” and affirmed. View "Webb v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Courtney Rainey was indicted on two counts: (I) voter fraud; and (II) witness intimidation. The jury found Rainey guilty of Count II but could not decide on Count I, and the circuit court declared a mistrial as to Count I. On the conviction for Count II, Rainey was sentenced to serve fifteen years with three years suspended and five years’ probation, together with court costs and fees. The circuit court denied Rainey’s post-trial motions. A divided Court of Appeals reversed and rendered Rainey’s conviction and sentence, finding insufficient evidence to support conviction under Count II. The State filed a petition for writ of certiorari arguing that the Court of Appeals erred in finding insufficient evidence relating to Rainey’s conviction for witness intimidation, and that Rainey’s sentence did not amount to cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment. After review, the Mississippi Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated and affirmed the circuit court's judgment. View "Rainey v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Bobby Batiste was convicted of capital murder for which he was sentenced to death. The Mississippi Supreme Court later granted Batiste the right to file a petition for post-conviction relief (PCR) ("Batiste II") because the Court determined he was entitled to a hearing regarding alleged communications between bailiffs and/or others and members of the jury. During the hearings on Batiste’s PCR petition, a motion requesting the recusal of the trial judge was made, arguing that the judge's own memory of an alleged conversation with a juror could be relied on in witness-credibility determinations while evaluating the merits underlying the PCR petition. This motion was denied and, ultimately, the PCR petition was denied. Batiste appealed both the denial of the motion to recuse as well as the denial of the PCR petition on the merits. In September 2020, having found that evidentiary questions remained relating to the recusal issue, the Supreme Court declined to address the merits of the PCR petition and remanded the case (Batiste III). On November 20, 2020, the circuit court held a hearing pursuant to the Supreme Court's directions for remand in Batiste III “for the limited purpose of allowing the trial judge to hear such evidence as is necessary to allow him to clear up any ambiguity and to determine if the alleged conversation did, in fact, take place ‘during trial,’ and, if it did, whether the conversation is alleged to have occurred on or off the record.” After that hearing, the circuit court found that the alleged discussion between the court and the witness took place after the guilt and the Supreme Court affirmed the circuit court’s denial of Batiste’s motion to recuse and his PCR petition. View "Batiste v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Janarious Jones was indicted by grand jury for for first-degree murder. A jury would ultimately convict him of manslaughter, for which he was sentenced to prison for twenty years, with five years suspended. After denial of his post-trial motions, Jones appealed, arguing: (1) the circuit court erred by not requiring the jury to specify which theory of manslaughter the jury used to convict Jones; (2) the State presented insufficient evidence to support a heat-of-passion manslaughter conviction; and (3) the circuit court committed reversible error when it dispersed the jury for lunch. Finding no error, the Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed Jones’s conviction and sentence. View "Jones v. Mississippi" on Justia Law