294 So.3d 699
Miss. Ct. App.2020Background
- On Dec. 17, 2015, Stevens and four others left a Neshoba County clothing store after taking merchandise; store video showed them passing items and concealing merchandise in bags/purses.
- Employee Alexander saved the surveillance video to a thumb drive and gave it to Officer Moore; Officer Moore later died and much of the multi-angle footage could not be located—only one camera angle remained.
- Crime Stoppers tips led to an arrest warrant issued Jan. 4, 2016; a grand jury indicted Stevens Jan. 11, 2018. Stevens moved to dismiss claiming the prosecution was time-barred and violated her speedy-trial right; the motion was denied.
- Trial evidence included the remaining security footage, testimony about missing footage, and an inventory/receipt showing stolen merchandise valued at $3,315.50. Stevens was convicted of felony shoplifting.
- She was sentenced to five years’ imprisonment, fined, and ordered to pay restitution; the sentencing order required placement in a restitution center while on early release until fines/restitution were paid.
- On appeal Stevens raised multiple issues (statute of limitations, speedy trial, evidentiary rulings including best-evidence and expert/hearsay objections, jury instructions, and that her sentence exceeded the statutory maximum); the Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Stevens' Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness/statute of limitations | Prosecution not commenced within two years of offense (Dec. 17, 2015) | Arrest warrant (Jan. 4, 2016) commenced prosecution within two-year period | Denied: issuance of arrest warrant commenced prosecution; statute not tolled—timely prosecution |
| Speedy-trial | Delay between warrant and indictment violated right to speedy trial | No supporting authority; procedural rules require citation | Procedurally barred for lack of cited authority |
| Best-evidence / lost video | Admission of remaining footage and testimony about missing angles violates best-evidence rule | Original was lost without bad faith; secondary evidence admissible under MRE 1004(a) | No abuse of discretion; loss shown to be without bad faith; testimony and remaining footage admissible |
| Aiding-and-abetting instruction | Instruction not supported by evidence of concerted action | Video and testimony show passing of merchandise and coordinated theft | Instruction properly given; supported by evidence |
| Lesser-included (misdemeanor) instruction | Jury should have been allowed to consider misdemeanor shoplifting (value < $1,000) | Inventory/receipt and testimony established value > $1,000; no contradictory evidence offered | Properly refused; only proof showed value exceeded $1,000 |
| Expert-opinion objection | Wilkerson improperly offered expert opinion on shoplifting without being qualified | No contemporaneous objection on expert-qualification grounds at trial | Procedurally barred on appeal for failure to object with specificity |
| Hearsay / Crime Stoppers tips | Chief Myers’ testimony about identification via tips was unduly prejudicial hearsay | Officer did not relate content of tips or assert eyewitness statements; no objection at trial | No plain error: testimony did not convey content or assertions of anonymous tips |
| Sentence exceeds statutory maximum | Sentencing order could result in incarceration beyond statutory maximum to collect fines | Placement in restitution center only applies if released early; state law caps post-release supervision to statutory term | Sentence within statutory limits; order does not extend incarceration beyond statutory maximum |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Woodall, 744 So.2d 747 (Miss. 1999) (issuance of arrest warrant commences prosecution for statute-of-limitations purposes)
- Smoot v. State, 780 So.2d 660 (Miss. Ct. App. 2001) (statutes of limitations reviewed de novo)
- Milano v. State, 790 So.2d 179 (Miss. 2001) (adoption of model aiding-and-abetting jury instruction)
- Lacy v. State, 432 So.2d 1205 (Miss. 1983) (lesser-included shoplifting instruction requires evidence supporting lesser value)
- Strickland v. State, 220 So.3d 1027 (Miss. Ct. App. 2016) (secondary evidence admissible when original lost without bad faith)
- Roberson v. State, 199 So.3d 660 (Miss. 2016) (spoliation instruction requires evidence of bad faith destruction)
- Keithley v. State, 111 So.3d 1202 (Miss. 2013) (anonymous-tip identification testimony not plain error when content of tips not revealed)
- Williams v. State, 24 So.3d 360 (Miss. Ct. App. 2009) (trial court has broad discretion in sentencing; sentences within statutory limits are not disturbed)