361 So.3d 179
Miss. Ct. App.2023Background
- John Chadwick Grimes was convicted by an Alcorn County jury of manslaughter (lesser included from second-degree murder) and sentenced to 20 years (10 to serve, 10 suspended) with five years post-release supervision.
- During deliberations jurors asked for a definition of “depraved heart”; the court gave a supplemental instruction agreed by both parties.
- After verdict, defense counsel learned from Juror Janice Parrish that several jurors had used cell phones to Google legal terms (including “depraved heart”) and potential sentences for murder II and manslaughter while deliberating.
- Grimes moved for JNOV or a new trial based on juror misconduct and other evidentiary and instruction errors; the trial court summarily denied the motion without holding a juror-investigative hearing, finding no good cause to investigate.
- The Court of Appeals reversed only the denial of a hearing on juror misconduct (finding a good-cause showing) and remanded for an investigative juror hearing; it held the mutual-combat instruction erroneous but harmless and found other challenges procedurally barred or without merit.
Issues
| Issue | Grimes' Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court abused discretion by not investigating alleged juror misconduct (jurors Googling legal definitions and sentencing) | Jurors consulted extraneous prejudicial information (definitions and sentencing) during deliberations; this warranted an investigative hearing under Gladney/Roach | No good cause to investigate; definitions and sentencing searches were within jurors’ common knowledge and not inherently prejudicial; presumed jurors follow instructions | Reversed and remanded: trial court abused discretion by refusing a hearing. Good-cause shown to question jurors about extraneous information; sentencing-searches are improper extraneous matter. |
| Whether the mutual-combat manslaughter instruction had evidentiary support | Instruction unsupported by record facts and misstated law | Initially defended, then conceded on appeal there was no factual basis; argued any error harmless | Instruction erroneous but harmless because other correct manslaughter and self-defense instructions adequately informed jury. |
| Whether exclusion of evidence about victim’s violent reputation/prior fights violated Grimes’ right to present self-defense evidence | Excluding victim’s reputation/prior acts prevented proof of reasonableness of Grimes’ fear and self-defense | Objection preserved not in the record; bench conference unrecorded; evidence remoteness and relevance issues | Issue procedurally barred—Grimes failed to preserve the bench-conference record and make a contemporaneous proffer. |
| Whether admission of autopsy/final pathology, Dr. Davis’s certainty, toxicology exclusion, and redirect of Dr. Draper were erroneous | Autopsy contained hearsay; Davis’s opinions not to reasonable medical certainty; toxicology improperly excluded; redirect exceeded scope | Objections were not timely or preserved; redirect was proper rebuttal to cross-examination | Most of these claims are procedurally barred or waived for lack of contemporaneous objection; redirect was within trial court discretion and not an abuse. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gladney v. Clarksdale Beverage Co., 625 So. 2d 407 (Miss. 1993) (procedure and "good cause" standard for investigating juror misconduct)
- Rutland v. State, 60 So. 3d 137 (Miss. 2011) (limits on juror testimony under Rule 606(b); juror statements about deliberative influence are generally inadmissible)
- Roach v. State, 116 So. 3d 126 (Miss. 2013) (analysis of prima facie showing of extraneous influence and requirement to conduct further inquiry if good cause shown)
- Murry v. State, 218 So. 3d 303 (Miss. Ct. App. 2017) (post-trial juror-investigative hearing model and reversal where inquiry was insufficient)
- Marks v. State, 532 So. 2d 976 (Miss. 1988) (punishment is not a proper consideration for juries; sentencing information can be prejudicial)
- Milano v. State, 790 So. 2d 179 (Miss. 2001) (harmless-error framework for evaluating jury-instruction errors)