Dedrick Small v. State of Mississippi, 224 So. 3d 1272

In March 2014, Cortez Bass shot and killed Donterrius Jackson after a street encounter involving Bass, Dedrick Small, and others; witnesses later reported Small handed Bass a gun immediately before the shooting.
Bass was arrested, gave an unsworn statement to police admitting he shot Jackson but claiming self-defense and denying Small gave him the gun; he later testified at his own joint trial that Small did hand him the gun.
After the joint trial, the court severed Small’s case; Bass was convicted. For Small’s separate trial, Bass invoked the Fifth Amendment and was unavailable as a witness.
Small sought to admit Bass’s pretrial statement to Detective Clark under M.R.E. 804(b)(3) (statement against penal interest) to show Bass—not Small—brought the gun; the trial judge excluded it as hearsay.
The trial court and the Court of Appeals held Bass’s statement was part of a self-defense narrative (not sufficiently against penal interest) and, alternatively, lacked the corroborating circumstances required by Rule 804(b)(3); Small was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to life with parole eligibility.

Issue	Small's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Admissibility under M.R.E. 804(b)(3): whether Bass’s post-arrest statement was a statement against penal interest and thus admissible hearsay	Bass’s statement that he retrieved the gun himself and that Small did not hand him the gun tended to show Bass’s premeditation and thus was against his penal interest	Bass’s statement was a claim of self-defense (a defense narrative), not a statement against penal interest; thus hearsay and inadmissible	Court held the statement was not clearly against penal interest because it fit Bass’s self-defense account and was properly excluded
Corroboration requirement of Rule 804(b)(3): whether attendant circumstances clearly indicated the statement’s trustworthiness	Even if some portions were against interest, corroboration existed (Small argued circumstances showed trustworthiness)	The statement was inconsistent, contradicted by sworn trial testimony and eyewitnesses, and lacked clear corroboration	Court held corroboration was inadequate; exclusion proper

Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (mandatory life-without-parole for juveniles unconstitutional) (context: sentencing principle)
Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (juvenile life without parole in non-homicide cases unconstitutional) (context: juvenile sentencing principle)
Hartfield v. State, 161 So. 3d 125 (Miss. 2015) (standard for evaluating statements against penal interest and abuse-of-discretion review)
Bailey v. State, 78 So. 3d 308 (Miss. 2012) (statement claiming self-defense not admissible under Rule 804(b)(3))
Robinson v. State, 758 So. 2d 480 (Miss. Ct. App. 2000) (self-defense declarations are not statements against penal interest)
Williamson v. United States, 512 U.S. 594 (Supreme Court guidance to consider statements in context for against-interest analysis)
Lacy v. State, 700 So. 2d 602 (Miss. 1997) (corroboration requirement for statements against penal interest)
Jacobs v. State, 870 So. 2d 1202 (Miss. 2004) (unavailability when declarant invokes Fifth Amendment)
Williams v. State, 667 So. 2d 15 (Miss. 1996) (requirement that statement clearly implicate declarant in criminal conduct)
Smith v. State, 986 So. 2d 290 (Miss. 2008) (noting limits of prior decisions on hearsay exceptions)