Jeffrey Lance Hill v. State of Mississippi
215 So. 3d 518
| Miss. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Jeffrey Hill, an MSU student living at Aiken Village apartments, was arrested after admitting to police that a rifle was in his closet; he possessed a World War II-era Mosin Nagant and ammunition.
- Hill was tried three times for possession of a firearm on educational property (Miss. Code § 97-37-17); first trial ended in a mistrial, second reversed by the Mississippi Supreme Court due to conflict-of-counsel issues, third resulted in conviction and three-year sentence (with credit for time served).
- At the third trial Hill represented himself with appointed counsel serving in an advisory capacity; his appellate counsel filed a Lindsey brief confessing no nonfrivolous issues, and Hill filed a pro se brief raising many claims.
- Central disputed facts: whether Aiken Village was "educational property" and whether MSU owned/operated it; evidence showed the complex was open only to MSU students and managed by MSU Housing.
- Key contested legal issues raised on appeal included property ownership/operation status under the statute, adequacy of posted notice, the absence of Hill’s former roommate (a confidential informant) from trial, and alleged Fourth Amendment violations for the officers’ entry.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Aiken Village qualifies as "educational property" under §97-37-17 | Hill: Aiken Village was not owned by MSU; deeds/authentication lacking so property not covered | State: statute covers property "owned, used or operated" by a university; Aiken was operated/managed by MSU Housing so covered | Court: Sufficiency of evidence that Aiken was "operated" by MSU; ownership dispute immaterial—conviction affirmed |
| Whether statutory "posting" requirement (§97-37-17(8)) is an element of the crime | Hill: No proof a copy of the statute was posted at Aiken; noncompliance requires reversal | State: Posting requirement is separate and does not negate subsection (2); notice evidence from student acknowledgments suffices | Court: Posting is not an element; lack of proof of posting does not invalidate conviction |
| Whether absence of roommate/informant (Hatten) prejudiced Hill | Hill: State/defense should have located/subpoenaed roommate; his testimony was critical | State: No duty to find witnesses for defense; Hill could subpoena witnesses himself; roommate’s testimony not outcome-determinative | Court: No prejudice shown; State had no obligation to locate witness; claims meritless |
| Whether officers violated Fourth Amendment entering apartment | Hill: Entry lacked probable cause/warrant | State: Roommate consented to officers entering common area; Hill admitted rifle in closet; officer safety and exigency justified retrieval | Court: Consent and Hill’s admission validated officer presence and retrieval; no Fourth Amendment violation |
Key Cases Cited
- Hill v. State, 134 So. 3d 721 (Miss. 2014) (prior reversal for conflict-of-counsel error)
- Lindsey v. State, 939 So. 2d 743 (Miss. 2005) (procedure allowing appellate counsel to submit brief certifying no nonfrivolous issues)
- Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103 (U.S. 2006) (consent to entry by co-occupant and related Fourth Amendment principles)
- Washington v. Chrisman, 455 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1982) (officer safety and warrantless searches incident to interactions)
- United States v. Roberts, 612 F.3d 306 (5th Cir. 2010) (retrieval of weapon incident to consent/encounter)
- Cowart v. State, 178 So. 3d 651 (Miss. 2015) (appellate briefing rule 28(a)(7) procedural bar standards)