121 So. 3d 269
Miss. Ct. App.2013Background
- November 16, 2000: four men robbed a Trustmark National Bank in Jackson; witnesses saw four robbers exit with a bag and guns and flee in a vehicle; a dye pack exploded and the suspects abandoned the car.
- Police captured three suspects fleeing; David Braggs was arrested four days later and admitted being with the perpetrators beforehand but claimed he left before the robbery.
- Hinds County grand jury indicted Braggs and three co-defendants for armed robbery; the three co-defendants pled guilty; Braggs was tried by jury in November 2004.
- Bank employees could not positively identify Braggs in the bank, but surveillance photos (photo nine showing a man in a Yankees cap) and other witness testimony tied a Yankees cap to the scene; an FBI agent identified Braggs from that photograph.
- Horton (co-defendant) initially made pretrial statements implicating Braggs but largely refused to identify or incriminate Braggs at trial, invoking the Fifth Amendment; defense counsel did not move for mistrial when Horton invoked the privilege.
- The jury convicted Braggs of armed robbery; he was sentenced to 25 years. On appeal Braggs contended his trial counsel was ineffective, which deprived him of a fair trial.
Issues
| Issue | Braggs' Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial counsel was ineffective under Strickland | Counsel elicited testimony and framed voir dire in ways that invited inculpatory testimony from co-defendants and agents, undermining Braggs’ defense | Counsel’s questions were part of trial strategy and any elicited evidence did not make counsel’s performance deficient; substantial evidence supports conviction even excluding disputed testimony | Court held counsel was not ineffective; record did not show deficient performance or prejudice, so Strickland not met |
| Whether the conviction rests on sufficient/ admissible evidence (including co-defendant statements) | The State lacked substantive direct evidence placing Braggs in the bank; defense argued failure-of-proof | State pointed to surveillance identification, eyewitness accounts of four robbers, Yankees cap link, and Horton’s prior statements as sufficient evidence | Court found the record contained sufficient evidence to support the jury verdict; denial of directed verdict/JNOV affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-part ineffective-assistance standard: deficient performance and prejudice)
- McClain v. State, 625 So.2d 774 (Miss. 1993) (review of sufficiency of evidence and acceptance of all credible evidence consistent with guilt)
- Archer v. State, 986 So.2d 951 (Miss. 2008) (appellate consideration of ineffectiveness claims on direct appeal only when record fully reveals facts)
- Liddell v. State, 7 So.3d 217 (Miss. 2009) (trial counsel’s elicitation of damaging testimony can nonetheless be deemed trial strategy and not ineffective assistance)