Francis S. Bowling

This case concerned the Mississippi Public Service Commission's denial of South Central Bell Telephone Company's requested intrastate rate increase, which the company had implemented under bond. The Chancery Court reversed the Commission's order and directed approval of rates sufficient for an 11.85% return on the adjusted rate base. On appeal, the Mississippi Supreme Court reversed the Chancellor, reinstated the Commission's denial, and remanded for further proceedings. The Court held that the Commission, as the expert fact-finder and legislative arm, is entitled to a presumption of validity for its orders when supported by substantial evidence, and the utility bears the burden of proving entitlement to any increase. It found the Commission's determination neither arbitrary nor confiscatory under the applicable statutes and precedents governing utility regulation.

business & regulatory

Jeff Yates was convicted of murder after shooting a man dating his estranged wife and was sentenced to life imprisonment. The main issue on appeal was whether his confession was admissible, given that police refused access to an attorney hired by his parents who arrived at the jail during interrogation, without informing Yates of the attorney's presence, though Yates had received Miranda warnings and signed a waiver of rights. The Mississippi Supreme Court held the confession admissible, ruling that the waiver was knowing and intelligent under the totality of circumstances. The court followed the line of authority that does not require police to notify a suspect of counsel's presence absent a request for an attorney, and it overruled prior state precedent to the contrary.

criminal lawprocedure

Stringer v. State involved the conviction of James R. Stringer in Hinds County Circuit Court for capital murder arising from the 1982 armed robbery and killings of Ray and Nell McWilliams in their home, with the jury imposing a death sentence after a bifurcated trial. On appeal and in a related writ of error coram nobis proceeding, Stringer raised multiple assignments of error, including improper cross-examination about lie detector tests and drug use, admission of unrelated evidence such as a concealed weapon, ineffective assistance of counsel, and questioning a witness about prior charges. The Mississippi Supreme Court reviewed the full record, including accomplice testimony from Mike Meddars and Rhonda Brock corroborated by other evidence, and found no merit in the claims of evidentiary error, procedural unfairness, or ineffective representation. The court therefore affirmed both the guilt-phase conviction and the death sentence, directing execution to proceed. The opinion also catalogs other affirmed Mississippi death penalty cases for reference.

criminal lawprocedure

In Blanks v. State, Kenny Blanks and Paul Robinson were jointly tried and convicted of armed robbery in Newton County Circuit Court and each sentenced to thirty years in prison after the jury could not agree on a sentence. On appeal, they challenged the denial of a severance, the admission of eyewitness identification testimony by Gatha Lackey, the limit on peremptory challenges for jointly tried defendants, a judge's comment during testimony, and the giving of a Sharplin jury instruction. The Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed the convictions, holding that the trial judge did not abuse discretion in denying severance because the evidence did not prejudice one defendant over the other, that the identification was reliable under the totality of the circumstances and not impermissibly suggestive, and that the remaining assignments of error did not constitute reversible error under state law and precedent.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involves Marion Albert Pruett's petition to the Mississippi Supreme Court for leave to file a writ of error coram nobis in the Circuit Court of Lowndes County, seeking to challenge his 1982 capital murder conviction and death sentence, which had been affirmed on direct appeal. The court denied the petition, holding that the claims—such as issues with jury instructions, closing arguments, pre-sentence reports, and appellate review—were either procedurally barred because they were not properly raised at trial or on appeal, or constituted improper attempts to relitigate matters already decided. The core reasoning relied on established principles that coram nobis is an extraordinary remedy limited to correcting errors of fact outside the record that were unknown at the time of trial and not discoverable through due diligence, and that post-conviction proceedings do not allow multiple bites at the apple after the opportunity for a fair trial and appeal has passed.

criminal lawprocedure

The case concerned whether an insurance company could be held liable for punitive damages after denying a policyholder's claim for hospital and medical benefits under a newly issued hospitalization policy. The policyholder, who had a third-grade education, testified that the company's agent completed the application without reading the health questions and was told to obtain medical records from the applicant's physician, while the company later denied the claim based on undisclosed prior medical conditions such as transient ischemic attacks. The trial court submitted both the contract claim and the punitive damages claim to the jury, which awarded $2,416 in actual damages and $158,000 in punitive damages. The Mississippi Supreme Court held that the evidence was sufficient to create a jury question on punitive damages liability, reasoning that the company's arguable basis for denial did not preclude a finding of bad faith given the agent's conduct and the timing of the policy issuance. A dissent argued that the company's knowledge of the applicant's health history provided an arguable reason to deny the claim, precluding punitive damages as a matter of law.

business & regulatorytorts & liability

The case involves appellant Kenneth Wheat's motion for leave to file a petition for writ of error coram nobis and for a stay of execution following his conviction and death sentence for murder. Wheat raised multiple claims, including inadequate inquiry into his competence at trial, mental illness, use of incriminating statements, improper jury instructions and closing arguments, double jeopardy violations, ineffective assistance of counsel, and errors in appellate review. The Mississippi Supreme Court denied the motions, holding that nearly all claims had been fully litigated and decided in the direct appeal (Wheat v. State, 420 So.2d 229), were not raised in a timely rehearing petition, and were thus procedurally barred as res judicata. The court further found that certain claims were inappropriate for coram nobis relief or lacked merit based on the existing record.

criminal lawprocedure

The case concerned Marion Albert Pruett, who was tried for capital murder under Mississippi Code § 97-3-19(2)(e) after committing an armed robbery at a savings and loan, kidnapping employee Peggy Lowe, transporting her across state lines, and fatally shooting her. Following a bifurcated trial in which Pruett was convicted in the guilt phase and sentenced to death in the penalty phase, he appealed on grounds including improper venue and jurisdiction, erroneous admission of confessions obtained through promises of drugs, seating of a juror who had stated during voir dire that he could not impose the death penalty under any circumstances yet later voted for it, and introduction of an edited television interview during sentencing. The Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and death sentence, holding that the trial court properly applied the capital murder and sentencing statutes, that no reversible error occurred in the handling of evidentiary or jury issues, and that a juror may revise views on punishment after hearing the evidence. A dissent contended that the juror's contradictory statements created an incurable taint requiring resentencing by a new panel.

criminal lawprocedure

In Pruett v. City of Rosedale, the plaintiff sued the city for injuries caused by its negligence in a tort action, but the trial court dismissed the case based on sovereign immunity. The Mississippi Supreme Court abolished the doctrine of sovereign immunity for the state and its political subdivisions, overruling prior cases that upheld it, while preserving immunity for discretionary acts by legislative, judicial, and executive officials. The court reasoned that sovereign immunity, rooted in the outdated English principle that "the King can do no wrong," creates inequities in modern society and, being judicially created, can be judicially abrogated, though it delayed the effect until July 1, 1984, to allow legislative adjustment. The case was reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

torts & liability

The case involved Kenneth William Wheat, who was indicted for the capital murder of Joseph M. Mayer during an attempted robbery in Harrison County, Mississippi, after the young couple's bodies were found tied and shot following their honeymoon. Wheat received a bifurcated trial, resulting in a guilty verdict for capital murder and a death sentence by the jury. The Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and death penalty, reasoning that sufficient evidence supported the three statutory aggravating circumstances found by the jury, the trial judge properly instructed the jury to limit its consideration to proven aggravating factors under the capital murder statute, and the sentence was not the product of passion or prejudice and was consistent with other death penalty cases reviewed by the court.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved a minor plaintiff suing the Jackson Municipal Airport Authority for tort damages after an injury at the airport, with the Fifth Circuit certifying questions to the Mississippi Supreme Court about whether the Authority enjoyed governmental immunity from suit. The court held that the Authority's operation of the airport remained a proprietary or corporate function under longstanding Mississippi precedent, so it was not shielded by immunity. The core reasoning was that the 1958 Airport Authorities Law's declaration of airport operations as public and governmental functions did not alter the proprietary character established in cases like Brummett v. City of Jackson, unlike the separate Municipal Airport Law which explicitly barred tort suits; the Authority's commercial activities further supported this classification.

torts & liabilityprocedure

Warren Robert Brown was indicted for the murder of Garnett L. Hawkins, whose body was found with a claw hammer embedded in his skull; after a jury trial in Hinds County Circuit Court, Brown was convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to 20 years in prison. Brown appealed, arguing that incriminating statements he made to Canadian police should have been suppressed because they resulted from an illegal arrest and were obtained without Miranda warnings, that the trial court erred in refusing his proposed self-defense instructions and barring related argument, and that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. The Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that Miranda did not apply to questioning by foreign officers who were not acting as agents of U.S. police, that the refused instructions misstated the law on self-defense while other instructions correctly covered the issue, and that the evidence—including Brown's voluntary statements and circumstantial proof—was sufficient to support the manslaughter verdict. The court further found that the affidavit supporting Brown's arrest established probable cause.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved Robert Lee Woods, who was convicted in the Circuit Court of Montgomery County on charges of burglary, armed robbery, and kidnapping after an incident in which he allegedly entered a victim's home, took money at gunpoint, and forced the victim to drive him to various locations over several hours. The trial court imposed a 15-year sentence for burglary and life sentences for the other two counts, treating Woods as a habitual offender under Mississippi Code section 99-19-81 due to his prior felony convictions. The Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed the convictions, finding sufficient evidence from the victim's testimony and corroborating witnesses to support the jury's verdict on all counts. It remanded for resentencing, however, because the judge could not impose life terms when the jury failed to agree on punishment (with statutory maxima of 30 years for kidnapping and a term reasonably less than life for armed robbery) and because the sentencing order failed to specify whether the terms would run concurrently or consecutively under section 99-19-21.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved a lawsuit by Foster and Bobbie Bailey against The Commodore Corporation for damages after repairs to their mobile home, manufactured by the defendant, resulted in flooding and property damage. The trial court directed a verdict against a co-defendant dealer and allowed the jury to award both actual and punitive damages to the plaintiffs, which the jury did in the amounts of $6,000 and $10,000 respectively. The Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed the judgment, finding that the evidence clearly established the manufacturer's agents negligently performed the repairs, causing the flood, and that the conduct warranted punitive damages due to reckless disregard of the plaintiffs' rights. The court also upheld the peremptory instruction on negligence and found sufficient evidence for the damage awards.

torts & liabilityproperty

The case involved William Tapp, who was initially indicted for murder but convicted of manslaughter in his first trial; that conviction was reversed on appeal due to the improper compelled testimony of his then-wife. After their divorce, Tapp faced a second trial where his ex-wife voluntarily testified, resulting in a murder conviction and life sentence. The Mississippi Supreme Court held that retrial after reversal for trial error did not violate double jeopardy under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, but trying Tapp for the greater offense of murder—after his first conviction on the lesser charge of manslaughter—did violate double jeopardy principles established in cases like Price v. Georgia. The court therefore reversed the murder conviction and remanded for further proceedings limited to manslaughter.

criminal lawprocedure

In Voyles v. State, Jimmy Voyles was indicted and tried in Lee County Circuit Court for the capital murder of Bernice Griggs, with the trial conducted in bifurcated guilt and sentencing phases under Mississippi's capital murder statutes. The jury convicted Voyles of capital murder and imposed a death sentence, finding aggravating circumstances including that the offense occurred during a robbery, was committed for pecuniary gain, and was especially heinous, atrocious, and cruel. On appeal, the Mississippi Supreme Court reviewed the full record, including the evidence of Voyles' relationship with the victim, the circumstances of her disappearance, the discovery of her remains, and the handling of her vehicle, and examined the trial court's instructions and procedures. The court concluded that the evidence supported the jury's findings, that the jury was properly instructed, and that no reversible errors occurred in the guilt or sentencing phases. The court therefore affirmed the conviction and death sentence.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved a lawsuit by Ernest R. Couch, a non compos mentis represented by his next friend, against two doctors for alleged negligence in failing to properly treat his gangrene condition while he was a patient at a state hospital, resulting in the amputation of both legs. The trial court sustained the defendants' general demurrer, dismissing the case. On appeal, the Mississippi Supreme Court reversed and remanded, holding that the declaration sufficiently alleged a cause of action under Mississippi Code Annotated section 11-7-35, which requires only a statement of facts in ordinary language sufficient for the court to proceed on the merits, even if the pleading was inartfully drawn. The court reasoned that the allegations provided enough substance to allow the case to proceed to further development rather than being dismissed at the pleading stage.

healthcareproceduretorts & liability