Gino Washington, Jr. a/k/a Gino Washington v. State of Mississippi, 355 So.3d 798

On July 8, 2018 Aaron Hancock was shot and killed during an apparent armed robbery; his girlfriend Kayla Gilmore was shot at and identified Gino Washington Jr. ("Little G") as the assailant.
Gilmore had prior daytime contact with Washington, selected his photo from a six-person police lineup five days after the homicide, and later positively identified him in court.
Investigators recovered the couple’s stolen cell phone being sold at an EcoATM the day after the crime; the EcoATM report included photographs and ID information linking the transaction to Washington. Washington was arrested nine days after the murder and found with a 9mm handgun.
The recorded police interview of Washington was contested at trial: parties agreed to redact prior-convictions and drug-use references but kept discussion of the gun; the original color lineup and the video of Gilmore’s selection were later unavailable at trial (copies were used).
At trial the jury convicted Washington of capital murder and armed robbery; he received life plus thirty years consecutively. He appealed, raising four evidentiary and due-process challenges.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Trial court commented on evidence by admonishing jury about death-penalty reference in recorded interview	Admonishment improperly commented on testimony and showed bias	Court argued it merely clarified a factual point (case was not death-penalty) and discouraged weight/credibility commentary	No error — clarification permissible; did not comment on credibility or weight
State failed to preserve original photo lineup and video of lineup selection (due-process loss of evidence)	Loss deprived Washington of impeachment evidence and violated due process	Trial court admitted a black-and-white copy of lineup; State did not act in bad faith in losing video	No due-process violation — lineup copy provided comparable evidence; defendant failed to prove bad faith as to lost video
Admission (or exposure) of Washington’s prior convictions and drug use in recorded interview	Inadmissible 404(b) evidence prejudiced jury if played	Court ordered those portions redacted; no contemporaneous objection after video shown; record does not establish improper playback	Procedurally barred and no reversible error — record does not show impermissible portions were played and defendant failed to object contemporaneously
Admission of 9mm gun into evidence	Gun was irrelevant because not tied to crime	Defense itself introduced the gun into evidence during cross-examination	No error — invited-error doctrine bars complaint where defendant introduced the gun

California v. Trombetta, 467 U.S. 479 (1984) (State must preserve evidence that is potentially exculpatory or material to defense)
United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (1985) (prosecutor must disclose evidence favorable to accused where material to guilt or punishment)
Jones v. State, 669 So. 2d 1383 (Miss. 1995) (trial judge must not display partiality or appear to side with prosecution)
Williams v. State, 761 So. 2d 149 (Miss. 2000) (trial court may clarify factual matters so long as it does not comment on witness credibility or weight of evidence)
Freeman v. State, 121 So. 3d 888 (Miss. 2013) (three-part test for due-process claim when evidence is lost or destroyed)
Anderson v. State, 25 So. 3d 1074 (Miss. Ct. App. 2009) (copies of photo lineups admissible if proper foundation established)
Jennings v. State, 311 So. 3d 712 (Miss. Ct. App. 2021) (invited-error doctrine precludes appellate review of errors induced by defendant)