Justia Mississippi Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

by
After being suspended from his long-term employment at a Walmart in Southaven, Mississippi, following an incident involving a coworker, the defendant planned and executed a violent attack targeting those he blamed for his suspension. Three days after the suspension, he shot and killed two Walmart managers, set fire to the store, and, during his attempted escape, shot a responding police officer. Surveillance footage captured the events, and the defendant admitted to the killings, arson, and shooting the officer during trial.A jury in the Circuit Court of DeSoto County convicted the defendant of two counts of capital murder and one count of attempted murder. The jury sentenced him to death for each capital murder conviction and to life imprisonment for the attempted murder. The defendant moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, which the circuit court denied.On direct appeal, the Supreme Court of Mississippi reviewed several claims: that the trial court erred in admitting evidence from locations other than the crime scene; that the evidence was insufficient to support the capital murder convictions because the arson and murders were not part of one continuous transaction; that the verdicts were against the overwhelming weight of the evidence; and that the court should abandon the M’Naghten Rule as the standard for insanity. The Supreme Court found no error in the admission of evidence, held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions under the one-continuous-transaction doctrine, determined the verdicts were not against the overwhelming weight of the evidence, and declined to abandon the M’Naghten Rule. The court also found the death sentences were not disproportionate. Accordingly, the Supreme Court of Mississippi affirmed the convictions and sentences. View "Abram v. State" on Justia Law

Posted in: Criminal Law
by
Jonathan Harrelson was convicted of statutory rape and sentenced to forty years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections. The incident involved Harrelson, who was forty-four, picking up two minors, Kendall and Valerie, and taking them to various locations, including a motel and a resort. Kendall testified that Harrelson had sexual intercourse with her at the motel, while Harrelson denied any sexual contact and claimed he believed the girls were older.The case was initially tried in the Jones County Circuit Court, where a jury found Harrelson guilty of statutory rape. Harrelson was sentenced to forty years and required to register as a sex offender. He filed a motion for a new trial, which was denied, leading to this appeal.The Supreme Court of Mississippi reviewed the case. Harrelson argued that prosecutorial misconduct deprived him of a fair trial and that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. The court found that although the prosecutor's comments about the absence of certain witnesses were improper, Harrelson did not suffer prejudice due to the substantial evidence of his guilt. The court also determined that the weight of the evidence supported the jury's verdict, noting that the testimony of the victim, Kendall, was corroborated by other evidence and that issues of credibility were for the jury to decide.The Supreme Court of Mississippi affirmed Harrelson's conviction and sentence, concluding that the trial was fair and the evidence supported the jury's decision. View "Harrelson v. State of Mississippi" on Justia Law

Posted in: Criminal Law
by
In 2008, the former Attorney General of Mississippi entered into a retention agreement with the Kilborn Firm to sue Entergy Corporation over electricity rates. The Kilborn Firm then agreed to split any compensation with Roedel Parsons, a Louisiana law firm. After years of litigation, the trial judge granted Entergy’s motion for summary judgment, dismissing the case with prejudice. The State did not appeal. Roedel Parsons then sued the State, claiming it was entitled to $34,625,000 as a third-party beneficiary under the retention agreement or, alternatively, for unjust enrichment and quantum meruit recovery.The Hinds County Circuit Court granted the State’s motion to dismiss under Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim. The court found that Roedel Parsons was not a third-party beneficiary under the retention agreement, as the agreement specified that any associated attorneys would be at the Kilborn Firm’s expense and at no cost to the State. The court also found that Roedel Parsons failed to state a claim for unjust enrichment and quantum meruit recovery, as the State had no obligation to compensate Roedel Parsons under the terms of the agreement.The Supreme Court of Mississippi reviewed the case and affirmed the lower court’s decision. The court held that Roedel Parsons was not a third-party beneficiary under the retention agreement and had no standing to sue the State for breach of contract. The court also held that Roedel Parsons failed to state a claim for unjust enrichment and quantum meruit recovery, as the State had no reasonable expectation to compensate Roedel Parsons. The court further found that the common-fund doctrine did not apply, as Roedel Parsons failed to identify a specific fund or class of beneficiaries. View "Roedel Parsons Blache Fontana Piontek & Pisano v. State of Mississippi" on Justia Law

by
Mississippi Methodist Hospital and Rehabilitation Center Inc. appealed the Hinds County Chancery Court's decision affirming the Mississippi State Department of Health's grant of a certificate of need (CON) to Encompass Health Rehabilitation Hospital of Flowood LLC. The Department identified a need for additional comprehensive medical rehabilitation (CMR) beds, prompting Encompass to apply for a CON to build a new facility in Flowood. Methodist opposed the application, arguing that Encompass's proposed facility would not meet indigent care requirements and would unnecessarily duplicate existing services.The Hinds County Chancery Court initially reversed the Department's decision, finding that the hearing officer failed to consider the relevance of a CON granted to Baptist Memorial Rehabilitation Hospital - Madison LLC. However, the Mississippi Supreme Court vacated this decision, ruling that the hearing officer had considered the relevance of the Baptist CON and found it irrelevant. On remand, the chancery court affirmed the Department's grant of the Encompass CON, finding that the decision was supported by substantial evidence.The Mississippi Supreme Court reviewed the case and affirmed the chancery court's decision. The Court held that the hearing officer's findings were based on substantial evidence, including Encompass's commitment to providing indigent care and the unmet need for CMR services in the Jackson metro area. The Court also rejected Methodist's argument that the state health officer should have considered the impact of the Baptist CON, noting that this issue had already been resolved in the previous appeal. The Court remanded the case to the chancery court to determine the amount of attorneys' fees to which Encompass is entitled under Section 41-7-201(2)(f). View "Mississippi Methodist Hospital and Rehabilitation Center Inc. v. Mississippi State Department of Health and Encompass Health Rehabilitation Hospital of Flowood, LLC" on Justia Law

by
A minor, M.Y., was injured after falling into an open manhole on the lawn of Wingfield High School in Jackson, Mississippi, during a homecoming event. M.Y.'s mother, LaQuita Maxie, filed a lawsuit on his behalf against the City of Jackson and the Jackson Public School District (JPS), alleging negligence, gross negligence, premises liability, and res ipsa loquitur, and seeking compensatory and punitive damages.The Hinds County Circuit Court denied the defendants' motions to dismiss and later their motions for summary judgment. The trial court found that there were genuine issues of material fact regarding the defendants' notice of the dangerous condition and their duty to maintain the manhole. The court also determined that the defendants were not entitled to discretionary-function immunity under the Mississippi Tort Claims Act (MTCA).The Supreme Court of Mississippi reviewed the case de novo and found that the plaintiff failed to present evidence that either the City or JPS had actual or constructive notice of the open manhole. The court noted that the defendants provided evidence of no prior complaints or notifications about the manhole, while the plaintiff relied solely on the complaint and general premises liability principles without presenting probative evidence.The Supreme Court of Mississippi held that the trial court erred in denying the defendants' motions for summary judgment. The court reversed the trial court's decision and rendered summary judgment in favor of the City of Jackson and JPS, concluding that the plaintiff did not establish a genuine issue of material fact regarding the defendants' notice of the dangerous condition. View "City of Jackson v. Maxie" on Justia Law

by
A man was accused of attempting to commit statutory rape against his thirteen-year-old stepdaughter. The incident occurred in the early morning hours when the child’s mother discovered the man in bed with her daughter, who was nude except for a bra. The mother called 911, and the child was taken to the hospital and later interviewed at a Children’s Advocacy Center. The man was initially indicted on seven counts related to various alleged acts against the child, but all but one count—attempted statutory rape—were dropped or not presented to the jury at trial.The case was tried in the Warren County Circuit Court. Before trial, the court held a hearing to determine whether the child’s recorded interview at the advocacy center could be admitted under the tender years hearsay exception. The court allowed the recording, finding the exception satisfied. During trial, the court also admitted a 911 dispatch report over defense objections regarding hearsay and reliability. The jury heard testimony from the child, her mother, law enforcement, a forensic interviewer, and a nurse examiner. The defense challenged the credibility of the evidence and witnesses, but the jury found the defendant guilty of attempted statutory rape. The trial court sentenced him to fifty years in prison, with thirty years to serve.On appeal, the Supreme Court of Mississippi reviewed claims that the admission of the child’s interview and the 911 report were erroneous, that expert and prosecutorial comments improperly vouched for the child’s credibility, and that cumulative error deprived the defendant of a fair trial. The court held that no reversible error occurred, finding that the defendant’s confrontation rights were not violated, the evidentiary rulings were not plain error, and there was no improper vouching or cumulative error. The conviction was affirmed. View "Cole v. State of Mississippi" on Justia Law

Posted in: Criminal Law
by
The case involves a contested Republican primary runoff election for the office of tax collector/assessor in Pearl River County, Mississippi. Jo Lynn Houston was initially certified as the winner by a margin of two votes over Sandy Kane Smith. Smith challenged the results, alleging that two illegal votes were cast by individuals who voted in both the Democratic primary and the Republican runoff, and that a miscounted vote in the Carriere 5 Precinct should have been counted for him.The Circuit Court of Pearl River County found that the two illegal votes and the miscounted vote warranted a special election in two precincts where the illegal votes were cast. The court ordered that the results of the special election be added to the adjusted totals, which would then determine the final outcome. Houston appealed the decision, arguing that Smith did not meet his burden of proving that the will of the electorate could not be ascertained.The Supreme Court of Mississippi reviewed the case and affirmed the Circuit Court's decision. The court held that Smith had met his burden of proving the existence of illegal votes and that the two-vote margin made it impossible to ascertain the will of the electorate. The court found that a special election was necessary to determine the true outcome. The court also dismissed Smith's cross-appeal, which raised additional factual issues and alleged a conflict of interest with a county election commissioner serving on the special tribunal.In conclusion, the Supreme Court of Mississippi affirmed the order for a special election in the specified precincts and dismissed the cross-appeal, upholding the lower court's decision to vacate the original election certification and conduct a new election to resolve the contested results. View "Houston v. Smith" on Justia Law

Posted in: Election Law
by
Tony Clark was convicted of capital murder, attempted murder, and possession of a firearm by a previously convicted felon. His death sentence was affirmed by the Mississippi Supreme Court, and the United States Supreme Court denied his petition for writ of certiorari. Clark subsequently filed his first motion for post-conviction relief, claiming intellectual disability and ineffective assistance of counsel, among other issues.The Madison County Circuit Court initially reviewed the case, and the Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed Clark's convictions and sentence. Clark then sought post-conviction relief, which led to the current appeal.The Supreme Court of Mississippi reviewed Clark's motion for post-conviction relief. The court granted the motion in part, remanding the case to the Madison County Circuit Court for an Atkins hearing to determine if Clark is intellectually disabled, which would make him ineligible for execution under the Eighth Amendment. The court found that Clark presented sufficient evidence, including affidavits from medical professionals, to warrant a hearing on his intellectual disability claim. However, the court denied all other claims, including ineffective assistance of counsel related to mitigation evidence, Batson challenges, jury wheel issues, the avoiding arrest aggravator, jurors' racial bias, and jury instructions. The court also rejected Clark's cumulative error argument. The decision was to grant post-conviction relief in part and deny it in part. View "Clark v. State" on Justia Law

by
Joanne Pearson, a Republican candidate for Madison County Election Commissioner in District Three, won the election against Walter Young, Jr., a Democratic candidate, by a vote of 5,772 to 3,917. Pearson had filed her application to qualify as a candidate in January 2024, and the Madison County Board of Supervisors approved her candidacy in February 2024. Five citizens, collectively referred to as Brown, appealed the Board’s decision, arguing that Pearson’s application was incomplete and that there was a conflict of interest with the Board’s attorney, Spence Flatgard.The Madison County Circuit Court reviewed the case and denied Brown’s motion to disqualify Flatgard, affirming the Board’s decision to approve Pearson’s candidacy. The court found that Pearson’s application, despite some incomplete areas, met the statutory requirements for the position. Brown then appealed both decisions to the Supreme Court of Mississippi.The Supreme Court of Mississippi reviewed the case and affirmed the lower court’s decisions. The court held that the Board did not act arbitrarily or capriciously in approving Pearson’s candidacy. It found that Pearson’s application substantially complied with the statutory requirements, and any minor irregularities did not mislead the electors. The court also upheld the circuit court’s decision to deny the motion to disqualify Flatgard, finding no conflict of interest as the Board and the election commission were not adverse parties in this matter. The court concluded that the Board’s decision was supported by substantial evidence and was within its discretionary power. View "Brown v. Madison County Board of Supervisors" on Justia Law

by
Mercedes B. Clark was stopped by Officer Ricky Robinson for speeding and driving on the wrong side of the road. During the stop, Officer Robinson smelled burnt marijuana and conducted a DUI investigation. A search of Clark's vehicle revealed a clutch bag containing a half-smoked marijuana joint, multicolored pills, and items with Clark's name. Clark admitted the bag was hers but claimed a male acquaintance had put his belongings in it, which she thought was marijuana.A Lauderdale County jury found Clark guilty of trafficking eutylone, a Schedule I controlled substance. The trial court sentenced her to ten years without parole. Clark's appellate counsel filed a brief under Lindsey v. State, stating no arguable issues for appeal. Clark filed a pro se supplemental brief raising three issues: the exclusion of her after-arrest interview, improper jury instructions, and a request for parole eligibility for first-time offenders.The Supreme Court of Mississippi reviewed the case. The court found that Clark had agreed to the exclusion of her interview with Agent Wilburn, making her argument on this point meritless. The court also determined that the jury instructions were proper, as they required the jury to find that Clark "unlawfully, wilfully, and feloniously" possessed the eutylone, which implicitly included the requirement of knowing possession. Lastly, the court noted that it does not have the authority to amend statutes, thus denying Clark's request for parole eligibility.The Supreme Court of Mississippi affirmed Clark's conviction and sentence, finding no arguable issues warranting relief. View "Clark v. State of Mississippi" on Justia Law

Posted in: Criminal Law