Justia Constitutional Law Opinion Summaries

Defendant Melvin Grayer was convicted of burglary and sentenced as a habitual offender to seven years without the possibility of parole or probation. He appealed, arguing he received ineffective assistance of counsel because his trial counsel failed to request a circumstantial-evidence jury instruction and that he was sentenced as a habitual offender without competent evidence of his prior felony convictions. Upon review, the Supreme Court affirmed defendant's conviction but vacated his habitual-offender sentence enhancement, because the State failed to prove defendant was a habitual offender by competent evidence. The case was remanded for resentencing. View "Grayer v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Defendant Stanley Gimore was convicted of aggravated assault and possession of a weapon by a convicted felon. He stipulated that he have been convicted of two separate felonies. In appealing his conviction, he raised numerous errors. Upon review of the trial court record, the Supreme Court concluded that the lower court erred in allowing the introduction of admissible evidence as improper impeachment. This error was unduly prejudicial and affected Defendant's substantial rights. Accordingly, the Court reversed Defendant's conviction and remanded the case for a new trial. View "Gilmore v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Defendant Corey Thompson was convicted on two counts of robbery. The circuit court sentenced him to two concurrent terms of twenty years, with twelve served and eight suspended, and fines and costs. Defendant appealed his conviction. Finding no error, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Thompson v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Defendant Jimmie Roach filed a motion for post-conviction relief, claiming he was entitled to a new trial based on newly discovered evidence, and that a juror at his trial was exposed to extraneous information supplied by law enforcement personnel involved in his case. The motion was denied, and Defendant appealed. Finding no error in the trial court's decision, the Supreme Court affirmed the denial of his motion for post-conviction relief. View "Roach v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Five years following law enforcement's seizure of three cars and cash belonging to Willie Hampton in conjunction with his arrest, Tunica County's petition for forfeiture was granted. Hampton appealed, arguing that the delay violated his right to a speedy trial. The Court of Appeals remanded, instructing the trial court to establish a record. Upon review, the Supreme Court found that Hampton was incarcerated at the time of the forfeiture trial, and was therefore denied an opportunity to present evidence of prejudice. Accordingly, the Court reversed. View "One 1970 Mercury Cougar, VIN #0F9111545940 et. al. v. Tunica County" on Justia Law

Defendant John O'Connor was indicted for two counts of gratification of lust. A jury found him guilty on one count but not the other. He was sentenced to fifteen years, ten served, five suspended and five years of supervised probation. Defendant appealed his conviction, raising two allegations of error. Finding no merit to either, the Supreme Court affirmed his conviction and sentence. View "O'Connor v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Equifax, Inc. appealed the State Tax Commission's income tax assessment. Equifax contended its Mississippi taxable income was zero; after an audit, the Commission found that the standard apportionment method prescribed by regulation did not fairly reflect Equifax's business in the state. The Commission used an alternative method and then issued assessments against Equifax. After exhausting administrative remedies, Equifax petitioned the Chancery Court for relief. The Court affirmed the Commission's decision, but the Court of Appeals reversed. Upon review, the Supreme Court concluded that the Chancery Court did not err, and that the alternative apportionment method was not a violation of the State Administrative Procedures Act. Accordingly, the Court reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated the Chancery Court's judgment. View "Equifax, Inc. v. Mississippi Department of Revenue" on Justia Law

Honda Downs sued Dr. Peter Ackerman for her injuries after Ackerman rear-ended the vehicle she was driving. Ackerman admitted liability; the case went to trial on damages. The jury awarded Downs $20,000 but denied her motion for an additur or a new trial. Downs appealed, and the Court of Appeals found the jury's verdict was biased or otherwise against the overwhelming weight of the evidence. The case was reversed and remanded for an additur or new trial on damages. Ackerman appealed. Upon review, the Supreme Court found that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying the additur or new trial on damages. The appellate court's decision was reversed and the trial court's judgment was affirmed and reinstated. View "Downs v. Ackerman" on Justia Law

Over two years after his trial, Defendant Patrick Coleman was ordered to a retrospective mental competency hearing by the Court of Appeals because he erroneously had been denied a pretrial one. Finding that the nunc pro tunc competency hearing did not adequately protect Defendant's due process rights, the Supreme Court reversed the appellate and trial courts' decisions and remanded this case back to the trial court for a new trial. View "Coleman v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

A jury convicted Natasha Graham for murder and conspiracy to commit murder for which she was sentenced to life in prison. On appeal, she challenged the sufficiency of the evidence at trial. Finding the evidence sufficient for the jury to convict her, the Supreme Court affirmed. View "Graham v. Mississippi" on Justia Law