270 So. 3d 49
Miss. Ct. App.2018Background
- Eric Lott shot Adrian Eley after a confrontation in an apartment parking lot; Eley later died of multiple gunshot wounds. Lott turned himself in and admitted the shooting, claiming self-defense.
- Durr (the woman at the center of the dispute) testified Eley was unarmed, had confronted both her and Lott, and that Lott fired after Eley ran; Lott testified Eley had been threatening and physically aggressive toward him.
- Medical testimony (Dr. Davis, autopsy) and treating surgeon testimony (Dr. Bolls) described multiple entrance/exit wounds but disagreed on the path of one wound.
- Lott was indicted for murder (convicted of manslaughter) and acquitted on an aggravated-assault count; he received a 20-year sentence.
- On appeal Lott raised three principal claims: ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to request a Manuel-style self-defense instruction, improper expert testimony from Dr. Bolls under M.R.E. 702, and trial-judge partiality/assistance to the State.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance for failing to request a Manuel self-defense instruction | Lott: counsel should have requested an instruction allowing deadly force where victim was much larger though unarmed (Manuel instruction); absence deprived jury of his theory | State: trial record shows counsel requested and received two self-defense instructions covering the theory; no deficient performance or prejudice shown | Affirmed — no Strickland-level ineffectiveness; self-defense theory was presented by other instructions |
| Admissibility/qualification of Dr. Bolls under Rule 702 | Lott: Dr. Bolls was not tendered as an expert and relied on autopsy report, so his expert/pathology testimony violated Rule 702 and was hearsay | State: Dr. Bolls testified from his own treatment observations; defendant failed to timely object under Rule 702; plain-error review inapplicable because no clear legal deviation or prejudice | Affirmed — claim waived for lack of timely objection; no plain error; testimony was treatment-based and disagreement with autopsy did not require reversal |
| Trial judge partiality/assistance to State | Lott: judge improperly coached State (e.g., assisted in presenting Dr. Bolls, advising on exhibits, questioning to qualify Dr. Davis), denying impartiality | State: conduct fell within judge’s role (clarifying testimony, managing exhibits, exercising discretion to qualify experts); no contemporaneous objection made at trial | Affirmed — no reversible partiality; failure to contemporaneously object waived issue and conduct not so prejudicial as to require plain-error reversal |
Key Cases Cited
- Manuel v. State, 667 So. 2d 590 (Miss. 1995) (defendant entitled to a properly framed self-defense instruction when it is the only instruction presenting her theory)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong test for ineffective assistance: deficient performance and prejudice)
- Dartez v. State, 177 So. 3d 420 (Miss. 2015) (appellate limitation to trial record for ineffective-assistance claims; PCR may be proper forum)