If you are unable to see this message, click here to view it in a web browser.

Justia Daily Opinion Summaries

Supreme Court of Mississippi
December 11, 2020

Table of Contents

RW Development, LLC v. Mississippi Gaming Commission

Civil Procedure, Gaming Law, Government & Administrative Law

Rollins v. Hinds County Sheriff's Department et al.

Civil Procedure, Government & Administrative Law, Labor & Employment Law, Personal Injury

Carver v. Public Employees' Retirement System of Mississippi

Civil Procedure, Government & Administrative Law, Labor & Employment Law

Brown v. Mississippi

Constitutional Law, Criminal Law

Keller v. Mississippi

Constitutional Law, Criminal Law

McGraw v. Mississippi

Constitutional Law, Criminal Law

COVID-19 Updates: Law & Legal Resources Related to Coronavirus

Click here to remove Verdict from subsequent Justia newsletter(s).

New on Verdict

Legal Analysis and Commentary

Trump’s Lawyers Will Get Away with Facilitating His Anti-Democratic Antics and They Know It

AUSTIN SARAT

verdict post

Austin Sarat—Associate Provost and Associate Dean of the Faculty and William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Jurisprudence & Political Science at Amherst College—predicts that because the lawyer discipline process is broken, President Trump’s lawyers will get away with facilitating his anti-democratic misconduct. Professor Sarat notes that Lawyers Defending American Democracy (LDAD) released a letter calling on bar authorities to investigate and punish members of Trump’s post-election legal team, but he points out that while LDAD can shame those members, it still lacks the ability itself to discipline or disbar.

Read More

Supreme Court of Mississippi Opinions

RW Development, LLC v. Mississippi Gaming Commission

Citation: 2019-SA-01813-SCT

Opinion Date: December 10, 2020

Judge: Chamberlin

Areas of Law: Civil Procedure, Gaming Law, Government & Administrative Law

In appeals consolidated for the Mississippi Supreme Court's review, the circuit court affirmed the decision of the Mississippi Gaming Commission (MGC) to deny the gaming site application of RW Development, LLC (RW). The MGC and the circuit court found that RW’s proposed gaming site failed to meet the governing statutory and regulatory requirements under Mississippi Code Section 97-33-1 (Rev. 2014) in the first instance, and 13 Mississippi Administrative Code Part 2, Rule 1.4(d) (adopted May 1, 2013), Westlaw, in the second. The Supreme Court concurred with the Commission and circuit court that: (1) in case No. 2019-SA-01813-SCT, RW failed to provide evidence that its proposed gaming site was within eight hundred feet of the MHWL; and (2) in case No. 2019-SA-01815-SCT, RW failed to establish that the mean high water line point of reference was located on RW’s premises, that RW owned or leased the land contiguous to the point of reference and its proposed gaming site, and that the land would play an integral part in RW's project.

Read Opinion

Are you a lawyer? Annotate this case.

Rollins v. Hinds County Sheriff's Department et al.

Citation: 2018-CT-01614-SCT

Opinion Date: December 10, 2020

Judge: Griffis

Areas of Law: Civil Procedure, Government & Administrative Law, Labor & Employment Law, Personal Injury

Quality Choice Correctional Healthcare entered a contract with Hinds County, Mississippi to provide comprehensive medical care to inmates. Delorise Rollins was hired by Quality Choice as a nurse at the Hinds County Detention Center in Raymond and was injured in the course of her duties. At that time, Quality Choice did not carry workers’ compensation coverage. As a result, Rollins filed a petition to controvert with the Mississippi Workers’ Compensation Commission. The Commission found that the Hinds County Sheriff’s Department (HCSD) was not Rollins’s statutory employer and denied workers’ compensation benefits. Rollins then appealed, and the Court of Appeals affirmed the Commission’s decision. The Mississippi Supreme Court granted Rollins’s petition for writ of certiorari, and found that because the HCSD was not Rollins' statutory employer, workers’ compensation benefits were not available. The Court therefore affirmed decisions of the Court of Appeals and the Commission.

Read Opinion

Are you a lawyer? Annotate this case.

Carver v. Public Employees' Retirement System of Mississippi

Citation: 2018-CT-01045-SCT

Opinion Date: December 10, 2020

Judge: Josiah D. Coleman

Areas of Law: Civil Procedure, Government & Administrative Law, Labor & Employment Law

Brian Carver was employed by the Jackson Police Department as a patrolman for twenty years. In 2004, Carver was involved in an officer-involved shooting in which he shot and killed a suspect. In 2011, Brian Carver applied for non-duty-related and duty-related disability benefits due to his suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder relating ot that 2004 shooting. The Public Employees’ Retirement System of Mississippi “granted [Carver] non-duty related disability benefits but denied his request for duty-related disability benefits.” The denial by PERS was affirmed by the Disability Appeals Committee, the PERS Board of Trustees, the Hinds County Circuit Court, and the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals determined that “[a] plain-language reading of [Mississippi Code S]ection 25-11-114(7)(b) clearly distinguishes mental and physical disabilities.” The Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed, finding that the plain language of Section 25-11-114(6) required, at the time Carver applied for benefits, a physical injury arising from an accident or traumatic event occurring in the line of duty. "Post-traumatic stress disorder may cause physiological changes to the brain and manifest in physiological symptoms; however, no physical injury occurred in the line of duty in the case sub judice. The PERS Board’s decision was not arbitrary or capricious, and it was based on substantial evidence."

Read Opinion

Are you a lawyer? Annotate this case.

Brown v. Mississippi

Citation: 2018-DR-01256-SCT

Opinion Date: December 10, 2020

Judge: Griffis

Areas of Law: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law

A jury found Joseph Patrick "Peanut" Brown shot and killed a convenience store clerk during a robbery. He was sentenced to death, and had been on death row since 1994. Brown filed a successive petition for post-conviction relief in which he raised numerous issues. Most of the claims raised at this point were subject to the time bar, the successive-writ bar, and/or were barred by res judicata. The Mississippi Supreme Court determined the remaining issue was without merit. The successive petition was therefore denied.

Read Opinion

Are you a lawyer? Annotate this case.

Keller v. Mississippi

Citation: 2019-CA-01347-SCT

Opinion Date: December 10, 2020

Judge: Josiah D. Coleman

Areas of Law: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law

Jason Keller robbed and murdered Hat Nguyen in her Biloxi, Mississippi convenience store. A jury later convicted him of capital murder and sentenced him to death. The Supreme Court of Mississippi affirmed the conviction. On May 25, 2017, the Court granted Keller’s motion for leave to proceed in the trial court with a petition for post-conviction relief. Keller argued that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to investigate and discover significant mitigating evidence. After an evidentiary hearing, the trial judge entered an order denying Keller’s request for a new sentencing hearing before a newly empaneled jury. Keller appealed. Based on the strong presumption that trial counsel provided adequate assistance and on the highly deferential standard of review, the Mississippi Supreme Court determined trial judge did not clearly err by finding that trial counsel provided adequate assistance. "[T]he trial judge did not ignore evidence or conjure a tactical decision for trial counsel. Any error in conducting factual research beyond what was in the record was harmless error."

Read Opinion

Are you a lawyer? Annotate this case.

McGraw v. Mississippi

Citation: 2019-KA-01770-SCT

Opinion Date: December 10, 2020

Judge: Michael K. Randolph

Areas of Law: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law

Andrew McGraw appealed his conviction for forcible rape. The victim, SR, was a thirty-three-year-old woman with a standing condition of bacterial meningitis. She contracted bacterial meningitis as a two-year-old; the infection was "neurologically devastating." SR weighed less than fifty pounds, and spent most of her time bent in a fetal position. Muscles in her upper and lower body were severally underdeveloped. SR could not walk or talk. She required twenty-four-hour care and supervision. After SR's mother took SR to the hospital for a checkup, it was discovered SR was pregnant. Some time after SR’s admittance, her mother requested that SR’s child be terminated. The hospital Ethics Committee met and found this was an appropriate course of action. Three days later, SR was induced into labor. The child was born unresponsive. Individuals with access to SR's home were identified; in addition to the DNA samples from five men, DNA samples were also taken from the deceased child. After testing the samples, the laboratory was able to say with 99.999999998 percent certainty that Andrew McGraw fathered his daughter’s child. McGraw was indicted on one count of forcible rape and one count of incest; he was tried and convicted on both counts. He appealed only the rape charge, arguing the State failed to provide sufficient evidence to establish that his victim was incapable of consenting to intercourse. After examining the record, the Mississippi Supreme Court found there was sufficient evidence and affirmed McGraw's conviction.

Read Opinion

Are you a lawyer? Annotate this case.

About Justia Opinion Summaries

Justia Daily Opinion Summaries is a free service, with 68 different newsletters, covering every federal appellate court and the highest courts of all US states.

Justia also provides weekly practice area newsletters in 63 different practice areas.

All daily and weekly Justia newsletters are free. Subscribe or modify your newsletter subscription preferences at daily.justia.com.

You may freely redistribute this email in whole.

About Justia

Justia is an online platform that provides the community with open access to the law, legal information, and lawyers.

Justia

Contact Us| Privacy Policy

Unsubscribe From This Newsletter

or
unsubscribe from all Justia newsletters immediately here.

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Justia

Justia | 1380 Pear Ave #2B, Mountain View, CA 94043