Jimmy Shinn v. State of Mississippi
174 So. 3d 961
| Miss. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- Jimmy Shinn was tried in Lowndes County, Mississippi, and convicted by a jury of motor vehicle theft for taking Walter Poole’s 1983 Buick Century; sentenced to 10 years (3 suspended) plus 3 years post-release supervision and a $1,000 fine.
- Evidence: victim reported the car stolen; scrap yard located the Buick in Alabama; scrap-yard employee identified a white woman (“Peggy Cane”) and a black man as bringers; Kimberly Chain testified she and Shinn towed and sold the car and that she gave the money to Shinn.
- Detective Perrigin testified about statements from the scrap-yard employee and Chain; a January 6 receipt for a $200 title-loan payment to Shinn was found in Shinn’s registered vehicle.
- Shinn testified he did not participate, accused Detective Perrigin of coercing Chain into implicating him, and claimed Chain paid the title-loan money; Perrigin denied coercion.
- Post-trial, an earlier April 2012 grand larceny indictment (same VIN/facts) existed under a different case number; the record contains only minimal information about that prior prosecution.
Issues
| Issue | Shinn's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counsel was ineffective for not requesting a petit larceny instruction | Counsel should have requested lesser-included offense instruction so Shinn might have been convicted of the lesser offense | Petit larceny requires proof of specific intent and value threshold irrelevant to motor-vehicle-theft; no rational basis for jury to convict of petit larceny but acquit of motor-vehicle theft | Denied — no ineffective assistance; petit larceny not a plausible compromise verdict and counsel’s choice was reasonable |
| Whether counsel was ineffective for failing to object to hearsay (scrap-yard employee and Chain statements) | Failure to object deprived Shinn of exclusion of key testimonial hearsay, prejudicing the defense | Omissions can be strategic; Perrigin’s hearsay largely cumulative and not outcome-determinative | Denied — no ineffective assistance; strategy inference and no demonstrated prejudice |
| Whether counsel was ineffective for not moving to dismiss on double jeopardy grounds | Counsel should have moved to dismiss because a prior indictment based on the same facts existed and some favorable post-trial ruling occurred | Record insufficient to show prior disposition or that double jeopardy barred retrial | Dismissed without prejudice — record inadequate on direct appeal; claim preserved for post-conviction relief |
| Whether Shinn should be resentenced under petit larceny rather than motor vehicle theft | Shinn contends sentencing should follow the lesser-penalty rule if ambiguity exists between statutes | State charged motor vehicle theft clearly and unequivocally; indictment unambiguous and prosecuted under motor-vehicle-theft statute | Denied — sentencing under motor vehicle theft proper because State made clear choice of statute |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (standard for ineffective assistance of counsel — performance and prejudice prongs)
- Havard v. State, 928 So. 2d 771 (Miss. 2006) (presumption of reasonable strategic conduct; standards for evaluating counsel performance)
- Green v. State, 884 So. 2d 733 (Miss. 2004) (entitlement to lesser-included offense instruction when supported by evidence)
- Jenkins v. State, 888 So. 2d 1171 (Miss. 2004) (when multiple statutes may apply, sentencing statute with lesser penalty applies if indictment ambiguous)
- Carr v. State, 873 So. 2d 991 (Miss. 2004) (trial strategy decisions—motions, objections—generally insulated from ineffective-assistance claims)