Justia Constitutional Law Opinion Summaries

Timothy Ronk was convicted of capital murder and armed robbery for the 2008 stabbing death of Michelle Craite and the intentional arson of where she resided. He was sentenced to death and thirty years in prison, respectively; the Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed his convictions and sentences. Ronk sought post-conviction relief, raising five claims: (1) trial counsel was ineffective; (2) his sentence was disproportionate; (3) Mississippi’s death-penalty statute is unconstitutional; (4) cumulative error requires reversal; and (5) trial counsel failed to preserve the record for review. Finding that Ronk’s claims were either barred or failed to present a substantial showing of the denial of a state or federal right, the Supreme Court denied his motion. View "Ronk v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Lennon Thomas entered a small Hattiesburg, Mississippi convenience store with a bandana covering his face and carrying a gun. Once inside, he ran behind the cashier’s counter where the cashier had returned from a bank run, and was handling the store's money. The cashier’s husband had seen Thomas enter the store and yelled to warn his wife. He also pulled out his own gun in defense. Thomas grabbed the cashier by her neck and stuck his pistol to her head. She pleaded for her life. When her husband ran from the store to seek help, Thomas shot him in the back, dropping him on the concrete parking lot. Thomas then stuck his pistol in the cashier’s back and shot her before fleeing the store. Thomas was quickly captured by police officers in the nearby woods. He was arrested and later convicted of attempted armed robbery and two counts of aggravated assault. Thomas appealed, claiming that because no money was taken from the store, the State failed to prove he had attempted to commit an armed robbery. The Mississippi Supreme Court disagreed, and affirmed Thomas' conviction. View "Thomas v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

In September 2013, the Gertys filed a joint complaint for an irreconcilable-differences divorce. The joint complaint sat with the Chancery Court for almost two years, during which the parties cooperated with each other and faithfully abided by the Property Settlement Agreement (“PSA”), which was filed contemporaneously with the joint complaint. The PSA provided that Michael would have physical custody of the couple’s minor child. Michael was required to move to the Great Lakes area to fulfill a three-year military commitment when Joesie agreed that their son would move with Michael. Joesie made the decision not to move to the Great Lakes area, instead, moving into her paramour's mother's house. For approximately two years, Michael and their son lived apart from Joesie. In January of 2015, Michael informed Joesie that reconciliation was impossible and that he wanted her to sign and finalize the divorce papers. Joesie, upon the advice of her attorney, surreptitiously told Michael that she also was ready to complete the irreconcilable-differences divorce. Based on the advice of her counsel, Joesie waited until her summer visitation had begun pursuant to the PSA and until her son was physically in Mississippi before withdrawing her consent to an irreconcilable-differences divorce. Joesie and Michael then filed separate complaints for divorce on the ground of adultery, inter alia, and alternatively sought an irreconcilable-differences divorce. The chancellor entered a final judgment and decreed that a divorce should be granted, but that neither party was entitled to a fault-based divorce. She found that Joesie had failed to establish adultery. She found that Michael had proved adultery because Joesie had admitted it, but that Michael had condoned Joesie’s adulterous conduct. Then the chancellor sua sponte declared the statutory scheme under Mississippi Code Section 93-5-2 (Rev. 2013) unconstitutional and granted an irreconcilable-differences divorce. Joesie was granted custody of their child. After final judgment was entered, Michael, Joesie and the State asked for reconsideration because no party had asked for, pleaded, argued, or offered proof on the unconstitutionality of the statute. The chancellor significantly amended her earlier final judgment, increasing Joesie’s award to include a percent of Michael’s military-retirement benefit and reducing the noncustodial parent’s summer visitation from three months, as provided in the PSA, to one month, contrary to the PSA and the chancellor’s original final judgment. The State appealed the chancellor's adjudication of 93-5-2 as unconstitutional. Michael appealed the trial court's adjudication of 93-5-2 as unconstitutional; (2) failing to award Michael a divorce on the ground of adultery; (3) reducing Michael’s summer visitation; (4) awarding Joesie a portion of Michael’s retirement benefits; and (5) awarding custody to Joesie. The Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed the chancellor’s finding regarding custody and child support, but reversed the remaining judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings. View "Gerty v. Gerty" on Justia Law

Richard Gerald Jordan was sentenced to death following his conviction on charges of kidnapping and murdering Edwina Marter in 1976. In his Second Successive Petition for Post-Conviction Relief, Jordan challenged the Mississippi Department of Corrections’ (MDOC) using midazolam as the first drug in its three-drug lethal-injection protocol. According to Jordan, midazolam did not meet the requirements set forth in Mississippi Code Section 99-19-51(1) (Supp. 2018), which directed MDOC to use “an appropriate anesthetic or sedative” as the first drug. Because Jordan failed to provide sufficient support to warrant an evidentiary hearing, the Mississippi Supreme Court denied his petition. View "Jordan v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

In this, Thomas Edwin Loden Jr.’s fourth petition for post-conviction relief, he challenged the Mississippi Department of Corrections’ use of midazolam in its lethal-injection protocol. He claimed that midazolam was not an “appropriate anesthetic or sedative” that, “if properly administered in a sufficient quantity, is likely to render the condemned inmate unconscious, so that the execution process should not entail a substantial risk of severe pain” under Mississippi Code Section 99-19-51 (Supp. 2018). Loden requested the Mississippi Supreme Court to enter an order forbidding the State from using any drug, including midazolam, as the first drug in its lethal-injection series. The Court determined, from review of Loden's filings and affidavits on whether a 500-milligram dose of midazolam met Mississippi’s statutory definition of an “appropriate anesthetic or sedative,” Loden offered no more than the ipse dixit arguments of his expert, Craig W. Stevens, Ph.D. "Loden has failed to carry his burden of proof in presenting a substantial showing of the denial of a state or federal right as required by Mississippi Code Section 99-39-27 (Rev. 2015), for the portions of his affidavits related to the efficacy of a 500-milligram dose of midazolam are a 'sham' and are not supported by established medical literature." Moreover, the United States Supreme Court considered the same arguments presented in Loden's petition and rejected them. Accordingly, Loden's petition for PCT was denied. View "Loden v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Brian King was indicted as a habitual offender and charged with one count of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. After being found guilty, King was sentenced to a term of ten years without the possibility of parole. King argued on appeal that the trial court erred in denying his request for a psychological examination and in allowing the introduction of evidence of prior bad acts. Finding no error, the Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed King’s conviction and sentence. View "King v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Michael and Vickie Kansler moved to Mississippi from New York for Michael’s job and, over the following years, exercised stock options stemming from that employment. The Kanslers took the position that the stock options’ income was taxable only in Mississippi, which reduced their tax burden significantly. New York saw things differently and found a substantial portion of the income taxable by New York. This liability to another state would have entitled the Kanslers to a credit on their Mississippi taxes worth more than $250,000. However, by the time the New York audit was finished, the Mississippi statute of limitations barred the Kanslers from amending their Mississippi returns. They argued the Mississippi statute of limitations unconstitutionally discriminated against interstate commerce. The Mississippi Supreme Court determined Mississippi’s treatment of the statute of limitations for amending tax returns was "unremarkable" and appeared to be shared with many other states. The Kanslers’ dormant Commerce Clause argument, on the other hand, was novel, and depended on an unprecedented and erroneous attempt to apply the “internal consistency test,” intended to evaluate the apportionment of taxes, to the collateral effects of a statute of limitations. The Court held that the challenge was instead governed by the discrimination/Pike v. Bruce Church, Inc. 397 U.S. 137 (1070) balancing test employed by the United States Supreme Court in Bendix Autolite Corp. v. Midwesco Enterprises Inc., 486 U.S. 888 (1988), the only United States Supreme Court case to scrutinize a statute of limitations under the dormant Commerce Clause. The Court affirmed the Mississippi Department of Revenue’s decision to refuse the refund request. View "Kansler v. Mississippi Department of Revenue" on Justia Law

A jury found Tobias Coleman guilty of aggravated assault for shooting a man in the head. The judge sentenced him to twenty years’ imprisonment, with five years suspended. After review, the Mississippi Supreme Court found the trial court committed reversible error by admitting into evidence an undated, grainy Facebook image taken of defendant holding what appears to be a handgun, years before the alleged crime, through the testimony of a witness who denied ever having seen Coleman’s Facebook page or the photograph in question. The matter was remanded for a new trial. View "Coleman v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Julian Hawkins was acting "erratically and unusually," and transferred from the Forrest General Hospital Emergency Room to Pine Grove Behavioral Health Center. At Pine Grove, Hawkins attacked a nurse and struggled against those who were trying to hold him down. He was charged with two counts of simple assault on “medical personnel.” The jury convicted him on one of those charges, and acquitted him on the second. Hawkins appealed, focusing his argument around alleged ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Because this issue could not be determined from only the facts contained in the record before it, the Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed Hawkins’s conviction, but allowed him the opportunity, if he chose, to raise the issue in a petition for post-conviction relief. However, because Hawkins was not properly indicted for the crime for which he was sentenced, the Supreme Court vacated his sentence and remanded for resentencing under the proper statute. View "Hawkins v. Mississippi" on Justia Law

Richard Green was convicted for the attempted murder and kidnapping of his wife, Cathleen Green (“Cathy”). Green appealed, arguing that the State presented insufficient evidence to convict him of both counts. After review, the Mississippi Supreme Court found a reasonable juror could have found that the State had proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, each element of both convictions based on the testimony, evidence, and applicable law. Therefore, it affirmed Green’s convictions and sentences. View "Green v. Mississippi" on Justia Law