Hymes v. State, 121 So. 3d 938

Background

Hymes filed a civil action in circuit court alleging wrongful conviction and imprisonment and entitlement to compensation; the circuit court held in 2011 that he failed to prove wrongful conviction after a bench trial.
The underlying criminal case (1990 indictment) charged possession of marijuana with intent to sell/distribute and unlawful possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, with Pearson as codefendant testifying against Hymes.
Pearson testified in Hymes’s criminal trial that they bought marijuana in Texas and hid it in building materials; a .22-caliber handgun was found in Hymes’s luggage.
Hymes later obtained post-conviction relief; his conviction was set aside and a new trial was ordered, but the State did not pursue it and moved the case to inactive status, releasing Hymes in 2000.
In the civil trial, Pearson’s prior testimony from the criminal trial was admitted despite Hymes’s dementia and lack of current witness testimony; the circuit court denied compensation after evaluating the evidence.
The Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed, ruling the statute’s constitutionality, denying a jury trial, and upholding admission of Pearson’s prior testimony as well as findings on marijuana possession and firearm possession.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Constitutionality of section 11-44-7(1)	Hymes argues burden-shifting and collateral estoppel.	State contends statute is constitutional and bar on relitigation does not apply.	Statute constitutional; procedural bar on first appeal does not apply and collateral estoppel not invoked.
Right to a jury trial	Hymes was entitled to a jury trial in the civil compensation action.	No jury trial right because suit against the State is not a common-law case; no jury was requested.	No error; jury trial not required and right is limited to cases at common law.
Admissibility of Pearson’s prior testimony	Pearson’s testimony unreliable due to ineffective assistance and dementia; authenticity concerns.	Pearson was cross-examined in the criminal trial and transcript properly certified; prior testimony allowed under Rule 804.	Admissible; circuit court did not err in admitting Pearson’s prior testimony.
Sufficiency of evidence on marijuana possession	Evidence did not prove Hymes had constructive possession; no ownership shown.	Circumstantial evidence and Pearson’s testimony establish constructive possession; cash and Texas ties support intent.	Substantial evidence supports verdict; no error in finding possession.
Existence of firearm possession	Inoperable gun should negate possession.	Statute punishes possession by a felon; operability not required.	Merits found; statute does not require operable firearm; issue is without merit.
Alternative compensation basis	Even if not proven for marijuana, there could be compensation on alternative grounds.	No merit since all issues were resolved against Hymes.	No additional basis for compensation.

Key Cases Cited

Johnson v. Sysco Food Servs., 86 So.3d 242 (Miss. 2012) (de novo review of constitutionality; presumption of validity)
Wells v. Panola Cnty. Bd. of Educ., 645 So.2d 883 (Miss. 1994) (right to jury trial limited to cases at common law; sovereign immunity)
5K Farms Inc. v. Miss. Dep’t of Revenue, 94 So.3d 221 (Miss. 2012) (procedural bar on issues not raised in circuit court)
Fulks v. State, 944 So.2d 79 (Miss. Ct. App. 2006) (two-prong test for admissibility of unavailable witness testimony)
Restaurant of Hattiesburg, LLC v. Hotel & Restaurant Supply, Inc., 84 So.3d 32 (Miss. Ct. App. 2012) (collateral estoppel principles in civil litigation)
Richardson v. Audubon Ins. Co., 948 So.2d 445 (Miss. Ct. App. 2006) (collateral estoppel applicability in related actions)
Goodin v. State, 102 So.3d 1102 (Miss. 2012) (counsel performance presumed competent absent objection)
Stewart v. The Miss. Bar, 84 So.3d 9 (Miss. 2011) (presumption of innocence vs. civil standards)