Justia Constitutional Law Opinion Summaries

A grand jury indicted Nina Buckhalter for culpable-negligence manslaughter after she gave birth to a stillborn baby girl. The circuit court dismissed the indictment, finding certain language in the manslaughter statute to be “vague and ambiguous,” when applied to “a woman who has caused the miscarriage or stillbirth of her unborn child.” The State appealed. Because the Supreme Court found the indictment was fatally flawed, it affirmed its dismissal without reaching the issue addressed by the circuit court. View "Mississippi v. Buckhalter" on Justia Law

William Antonio Avery was convicted of selling cocaine and felony fleeing. The Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction and sentence. On appeal to the Supreme Court, Avery argued the trial court committed reversible error in refusing to sequester the witnesses at the post-trial hearing. Finding no reversible error, the Court affirmed Avery’s conviction and sentence. View "Avery v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Defendant David Campbell was convicted of fondling a minor over whom he held a position of trust or authority under Mississippi Code Section 97-55-23(2) (Rev. 2006). The Court of Appeals reversed the conviction, finding that the State failed to prove that Campbell occupied a position of trust or authority as defined by the statute. Upon review of the matter, the Supreme Court found no merit in Campbell's claims of error, reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated Campbell's conviction and sentence. View "Campbell v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Defendant Carlos Taylor appealed his sentence of life without parole. On appeal to the Supreme Court, he argued the trial court abused its discretion in sentencing Taylor under Miss. Code Ann. Section 99-19-83, because the prosecution failed to prove all essential elements under the statute. The Court of Appeals affirmed. The Supreme Court concluded the trial court did not abuse its discretion by sentencing Taylor under Section 99-19-83. Accordingly, the Court affirmed Taylor's sentence. View "Taylor v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

A group of property owners filed suit against the Diamondhead Fire Protection District (DFPD) board of commissioners and several current and former DFPD officers, seeking declaratory judgment that a fee charged for fire-protection services was an impermissible tax. The trial court entered a judgment in favor of the DFPD. The property owners appealed, challenging: (1) whether the monthly fee is an illegal tax; and (2) whether the power to tax should be construed narrowly. Upon review, the Supreme Court found that the trial court correctly decided that the challenged fees for DFPD's services were lawful. Therefore, the Court affirmed the trial court's judgment. View "Alfonso v. Diamondhead Fire Protection District" on Justia Law

Defendant Ryan Scott Young appealed his convictions for felony driving under the influence (DUI) third offense, and retaliation against a public servant. On appeal to the Supreme Court he argued: (1) that the indictment did not include an essential element of the crime of retaliation; (2) that the trial court failed to instruct the jury on an essential element of the crime of retaliation; (3) that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury’s verdict on the DUI charge; and (4) that the verdict on the DUI charge was against the weight of the evidence and he was entitled to a new trial. After its review, the Supreme Court concluded all of Young's arguments were without merit, and affirmed his convictions and sentences. View "Young v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Eli Investments, LLC, sued Silver Slipper Casino Venture, LLC, Silver Slipper Gambling, LLC, and Broadwater Development, LLC, to recover for damages sustained to Eli’s Biloxi hotel when Silver Slipper’s casino allided with it during Hurricane Katrina. The trial court granted Silver Slipper’s and Broadwater’s motions for summary judgment. Eli appealed the trial court’s decision. Finding that Eli presented a genuine dispute of material fact regarding Silver Slipper’s negligence, the Supreme Court reversed the trial court's judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings. View "Eli Investments, LLC v. Silver Slipper Casino Venture, LLC" on Justia Law

Defendant Jermaine Reed was convicted by jury of aggravated assault of his ex-girlfriend. He had been adjudicated a violent habitual offender, and sentenced to life without parole. On appeal, defendant challenged his conviction and sentence. Defendant's appellate counsel filed a "Lindsey" brief, but defendant proceeded pro se. He argued that he received ineffective assistance of counsel throughout all stages of his trial; that the trial court erred in denying a pretrial mental health examination; and that the State amended his indictment out of vindictiveness. Finding no error or ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel, the Supreme Court affirmed defendant's conviction and sentence. View "Reed v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Defendant Joe Morgan directly appealed his convictions on murder and manslaughter charges, for which he was sentenced to life and twenty years' incarceration respectively. He challenged the denial of his requested jury instruction on imperfect self defense, and the denial of his motion for a mistrial. Finding no merit to defendant's arguments on appeal, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Morgan v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Defendant Brett Jones was convicted on murder charges for stabbing his grandfather to death. He was sentenced to life. Defendant was granted leave to apply for post-conviction relief. In his argument to the circuit court, defendant argued that he was fifteen at the time of the murder, and that his sentence violated his Eighth Amendment rights. The circuit court denied relief, and defendant appealed. While defendant's appeal was pending , the United States Supreme Court decided "Miller v. Alabama" (132 S. Ct. 2455 (2012)) implicating the issue of whether a life sentence violated a juvenile convicted of homicide's constitutional rights. The Mississippi Supreme Court concluded that "Miller" created a new, substantive rule which would be applied retroactively to cases on collateral review. The Court affirmed in part and reversed in part the Court of Appeals' judgment and the trial court's denial of post-conviction relief. The Court vacated defendant's sentence and remanded this case to the Circuit Court for a new sentencing hearing. View "Jones v. Mississippi" on Justia Law