Fredrick Smith, Jr. v. State of Mississippi
235 So. 3d 1441
| Miss. Ct. App. | 2018Background
- Frederick Smith Jr. was convicted in Hinds County Circuit Court of two counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon for a shooting at a Jackson gas station.
- Keyes identified Smith from a photo lineup and testified he was one of the shooters during the incident attended by two victims, Keys and Conner.
- During trial the court excluded third‑party identifications and tips from Crime Stoppers; Detective Camel testified about tips including a purple car, with a cautionary instruction to disregard vehicle identifications.
- Smith sought to present an alibi through Kenzoro Williams, who would testify Smith was with him at a club around 2 a.m.; the court barred Williams after a late disclosure.
- Appellant preserved issues on alibi disclosure, Confrontation Clause/ Crawford concerns, and sufficiency of the evidence for Conner; the appellate court reviews for abuse of discretion and sufficiency.
- The Mississippi Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for a new trial due to the alibi witness exclusion; it found the Confrontation Clause issue procedurally barred and held the evidence sufficient on the Conner count.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alibi witness exclusion | Smith argues alibi Williams should testify. | State contends Rule 9.05 requirement not triggered since no written prosecution demand. | Reversed and remanded for new trial. |
| Confrontation Clause—Detective Camel testimony | Testimony about tips violated Crawford and was improperly admitted. | Objection preserved as hearsay; however, argument was procedurally barred. | Procedurally barred; not decided on plain error basis. |
| Sufficiency of the evidence as to Conner | Insufficient evidence since Conner did not testify and eyewitness unreliable. | Eyewitness Keys identified Smith; jury could rationally infer guilt. | Evidence sufficient to support conviction for Conner; no merit. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hall v. State, 925 So. 2d 856 (Miss. Ct. App. 2005) (alibi notice triggered by prosecuting attorney under Rule 9.05)
- Ford v. State, 862 So. 2d 554 (Miss. Ct. App. 2003) (Rule 9.05 alibi disclosure requirements)
- Ezell v. State, 132 So. 3d 611 (Miss. Ct. App. 2013) (confrontation clause preservation versus hearsay objection)