Dennis Thompson v. State of Mississippi
230 So. 3d 1044
Miss. Ct. App.2017Background
- Around 1 a.m. on May 22, 2010, gunfire near Highway 182 in Starkville killed C.K. Randle and wounded three others; six .40 cal shell casings were recovered at the scene.
- Thompson was indicted for depraved-heart murder and three counts of aggravated assault and tried before a jury in Oktibbeha County (Oct. 27–31, 2014).
- Defense theory: self-defense and evidence suggesting multiple shooters or that Thompson did not possess a gun (witnesses Harris, Zuber, others testified they did not see Thompson with a gun or believed shots came from multiple directions).
- After the defense rested, the State sought to introduce in rebuttal a videotaped custodial interview in which Thompson admitted firing a .40-caliber handgun about six times; the defense initially objected but counsel later withdrew the objection on the record.
- The jury convicted Thompson of depraved-heart murder and three aggravated assaults; trial court sentenced him to 30 years for murder and consecutive/concurrent five-year terms on assaults. Thompson appealed, challenging (1) admission of the rebuttal evidence and (2) denial of fifteen proposed defense jury instructions (focusing on D-2 and D-3 concerning reasonable doubt).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of rebuttal witness / videotaped interview | State: rebuttal proper to counter defense witnesses (Harris, Zuber) who suggested Thompson had no gun or that shots came from multiple guns/directions; State need not use interview in chief when it supports self-defense theory | Thompson: admission was improper rebuttal evidence and should have been offered in State’s case-in-chief; further, trial judge abused discretion | Court: No error — defense counsel waived objection by withdrawing objection on record; even on merits, admitting interview as rebuttal was within trial court discretion and not an abuse (rebutted testimony that Thompson lacked a gun and claims of multiple shooters) |
| Denial of proposed reasonable-doubt instructions (D-2 and D-3) | Thompson: D-2 and D-3 were correct statements of law and necessary to instruct jury that reasonable doubt may arise from lack/insufficiency/conflict of evidence; omission prejudicial, especially after jury note asking about insufficient evidence | State: D-2 improperly attempts to define reasonable doubt; D-3 was argumentative or fairly covered by other instructions; trial judge acted within discretion; jury was adequately instructed and could be told to continue deliberating | Court: D-2 properly refused (Miss. precedent bars definitions of reasonable doubt). D-3 refusal not reversible — other instructions fairly and extensively covered reasonable doubt (Roby controlling). Trial court’s response to jury note was appropriate; no abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Baxter v. State, 177 So.3d 423 (Miss. Ct. App.) (waiver by counsel’s on-the-record withdrawal of objection)
- Armstrong v. State, 771 So.2d 988 (Miss. Ct. App.) (rebuttal evidence discretion explained)
- Williams v. State, 539 So.2d 1049 (Miss.) (rebuttal may be used to explain, rebut or disprove defense evidence)
- Riley v. State, 157 So.2d 381 (Miss.) (factors favoring admission in rebuttal where doubt exists)
- Fulgham v. State, 46 So.3d 315 (Miss.) (court disapproves jury instructions that define reasonable doubt)
- Roby v. State, 183 So.3d 857 (Miss.) (refusal of instruction like D-3 was not an abuse where other instructions extensively covered reasonable doubt)
- Banyard v. State, 47 So.3d 676 (Miss.) (defendant entitled to instructions presenting theory of defense if supported by evidence)
- Hughes v. State, 983 So.2d 270 (Miss.) (trial court must determine whether additional instruction is necessary when jury asks; may give supplemental instructions)
- Barnes v. State, 158 So.3d 1127 (Miss.) (requirements for refusing or granting defendant’s instructions)
- Myers v. State, 353 So.2d 1364 (Miss.) (admission of rebuttal evidence not reversible if defendant had opportunity for surrebuttal)
- Galloway v. State, 122 So.3d 614 (Miss.) (review of trial court response to jury inquiries is for abuse of discretion)