Justia Mississippi Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

James Ficklin was convicted by jury of taking away a motor vehicle. In 2018, police sergeant Patrick Burt received a call from dispatch concerning a possible switched vehicle tag. Burt testified that he learned that the address associated with the tag was located on Herman Alford Drive in Neshoba County. Burt went to the house at that address, but he found no vehicle there. Burt knew that the owner of the house, Hal Rudolph, had recently passed away, so Burt contacted the owner’s son, Walt Rudolph. Walt confirmed that his father passed away on May 1, 2018, and left behind a 2017 Chevy Z71 Silverado. Walt further testified that the owner of that vehicle would be his father’s heirs, and that this vehicle remained at his father’s house after his father passed away. Walt also testified that the police did in fact contact him and told him that his father’s vehicle might have been missing. Even though Walt was out of town when he learned about his father’s vehicle, a relative verified to Walt that the vehicle was indeed missing from his father’s house. Walt attempted to locate the vehicle through its OnStar capability; however, such efforts were unsuccessful. Weeks later, the vehicle was found at a towing service. After inspection of the vehicle, Burt found Ficklin's driver's license on the console; the vehicle's OnStar module had been removed. Police advised Ficklin of his Miranda rights' Ficklin confessed verbally he had researched online how to disable an OnStar module from a vehicle. At trial, however, Ficklin changed his story, testiflying someone else stole the vehicle and he only got in for a ride. Ficklin denied ever driving the Rudolph vehicle. Ficklin moved to suppress his confessions, but this was denied, and he was ultimately convicted. Finding no arguable issues in the record, the Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed Ficklin’s conviction and sentence. View "Ficklin v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Antwoine Cork was convicted by jury on three counts of sale of a controlled substance for selling cocaine to a police informant three times. Pursuant to the habitual and subsequent offender sentencing enhancements, the trial judge sentenced him to sixty years for each of the three convictions to run concurrently. On appeal, Cork argued: (1) his convictions for three separate counts of sale of a controlled substance violated the prohibition against double jeopardy; (2) his sentence violated the Eighth Amendment; (3) the trial court misapplied the law when sentencing Cork pursuant to Section 41-29-147; (4) the trial court erred by granting the State’s motion to amend the indictment; (5) the trial court erred by denying Cork’s motion for a continuance; (6) the trial judge should have recused; (7) Cork was denied effective assistance of counsel; and (8) Cork’s convictions were not supported by sufficient evidence. Finding no reversible error, the Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed Cork's convictions and sentence. View "Cork v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Tommie Queen was convicted of three counts of dog fighting in violation of Mississippi Code Section 97-41-19 (Rev. 2014). Queen appealed, arguing: (1) the trial court erred by admitting expert testimony; (2) there was not a sufficient evidentiary basis to support his convictions; and (3) the trial judge erred by not recusing. Finding no error, the Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed Queen’s convictions and sentences. View "Queen v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Johnny Nevels appealed his convictions on three counts of drug possession. He claimed he was entitled to a circumstantial evidence instruction, which the trial court refused. He also argued his trial should not have proceeded in his absence. After reviewing Nevels’s circumstantial-evidence-instruction claim, the Mississippi Supreme Court overruled its previous case law that required a special instruction ramping up the burden of proof in circumstantial evidence cases. Because the jury in this case was properly instructed on the burden of proof, the Court found no reversible jury instruction error. Furthermore, the Court found no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s determining Nevels had waived his right to be present and thus could be tried in absentia. Nonetheless, Nevels could not waive his right to be present at his later felony sentencing, making it an error for the trial court to sentence Nevels in absentia. Nevels’ convictions on three counts of drug possession were affirmed, but his sentences were vacated, and the case remanded to the trial court for resentencing with Nevels present. View "Nevels v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Talib Mujahid was convicted by jury of selling methamphetamine. He was sentenced to eight years in prison. His appellate counsel filed a Lindsey brief, certifying he found no arguable issues to appeal. Mujahid opted to file a pro se brief, arguing the judge should recused, a witness was wrongly allowed to testify, he was incorrectly sentenced as a habitual offender, and his trial counsel was ineffective. After review, the Mississippi Supreme Court found no merit to any of Mujahid’s claims, and affirmed Mujahid’s conviction and sentence for sale of methamphetamine. View "Mujahed v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

In March 2017, Sybil Brooks hired Jason Sebren to make repairs to a mobile home that she owned, and she allowed Sebren to live in the mobile home in exchange. Allegedly unbeknownst to Brooks, defendant Michael Buford began helping Sebren make the repairs, and he and his wife also moved into the mobile home. Subsequently, Sebren and Brooks had an argument, and Sebren moved out of the mobile home. Brooks stated that, because she did not have any agreement with Buford, told him to leave the mobile home. That same morning, Brooks also called the Pearl Police Department and stated that people were living in her rental house who did not have permission to be there. Four officers were dispatched to the property. One officer testified she asked Buford for any documents or proof that he was supposed to be at the home. Buford could not provide documentation. Another officer asked Buford “did he have any issues with me searching him and he advised he did not.” That officer conducted a search of Buford’s person and felt a can of smokeless tobacco. He opened the tobacco can and observed what he believed to be crystal methamphetamine. The issue this case presented for the Mississippi Supreme Court's review centered on whether a police officer who obtained consent to search the person of another, had to obtain additional consent to search a specific, innocuous container found on that person. The Court of Appeals found that the defendant’s consent to the search encompassed the search of the smokeless tobacco can found in his pocket. Finding no reversible error, the Supreme Court agreed and affirmed the decisions of the trial court and the Court of Appeals. View "Buford v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Yancy Stevenson was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder. On appeal, Stevenson contended the circuit court should have declared a mistrial sua sponte after one of the State’s witnesses testified that Stevenson had said that “he thought somebody was gonna snitch on him and he hate to kill somebody else” and that “he ain’t killed nobody in a long time.” Stevenson’s counsel did not object to this testimony, thus Stevenson also contended he received ineffective assistance of counsel. The Mississippi Supreme Court rejected Stevenson's claims: even if his counsel had objected, the threat was admissible as evidence of Stevenson’s consciousness of guilt, and its probative value was not substantially outweighed by its prejudicial impact. Likewise, the Court found no merit to Stevenson’s contention that this failure to object constituted ineffective assistance of counsel. Stevenson’s conviction and sentence were affirmed. View "Stevenson v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Mickeal Hollis was convicted by jury of possessing methamphetamine, for which he was sentenced to three years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections, pay a fine, and complete drug and alcohol treatment. Hollis appealed, but his appellate counsel found no arguable issues for appeal and filed a "Lindsey" brief. Continuing pro se, Hollis raised three issues the Mississippi Supreme Court determined were "vague allegations." Thus, finding no arguable issues or reversible error, the Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed Hollis' conviction and sentence. View "Hollis v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Cynthia Burford was convicted by jury of burglary of a welling. The circuit court sentenced her to serve fifteen years in the custod of the Mississippi Department of Corrections and to pay a fine, restitution and court costs. The Court of Appeals declined to review her argument her defense counsel rendered ineffective assistance by making an untimely motion to suppress her confessions, finding the argument was most appropriate in post-conviction proceedings. The Mississippi Supreme Court found Burford received ineffective assistance of counsel. A video of Burford’s confession shows that a peace officer made several threats and promises to Burford. The officer acknowledged during his trial testimony that he had made the threats and promises in an effort to induce Burford’s confession. Under the circumstances, defense counsel rendered deficient performance by failing to make a timely motion to suppress the video confession and a subsequent written confession. Burford was prejudiced because a reasonable probability existed that the trial court would have granted a timely motion to suppress the confessions and because the confessions were the primary evidence of Burford’s guilt of burglary of a dwelling. "But for the admission of Burford’s confessions, the State’s only evidence of her guilt of burglary was that stolen items were found at her residence and in a car registered to her relative." Because the record affirmatively reflected deficient attorney performance and resulting prejudice, the Supreme Court reversed and remanded for a new trial. View "Burford v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

In September 2019, Brian Turner was found not guilty of one count of aggravated assault upon a law-enforcement officer (Count I), but was convicted of one count of failing to stop a motor vehicle pursuant to the signal of a law-enforcement officer (Count II), two counts of aggravated assault upon a law-enforcement officer (Counts III and IV) and one count of possession of a firearm by a felon (Count V). Turner appealed his convictions and the circuit court’s denial of his Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict or, in the Alternative, for New Trial (J.N.O.V. Motion). Finding each of Turner’s assignments of error to be without merit, the Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed Turner’s convictions and the circuit court’s denial of the J.N.O.V. Motion. View "Turner v. Mississippi" on Justia Law