Jordan Davis v. State of Mississippi
162 So. 3d 805
| Miss. | 2015Background
- Jordan Davis was charged in Claiborne County with auto theft (trucks), grand larceny (tractor and other items), receiving stolen property (tractor), and conspiracy; conspiracy was dismissed before trial.
- Evidence showed Davis and another person sold a John Deere tractor and later a cotton trailer and a 1950 Chevrolet to Bulldog Scrap Metal; receipts were made out to Wren at Davis’s request.
- The jury acquitted Davis of auto theft and grand larceny but convicted him of receiving stolen property; the trial court sentenced him to eight years with four years suspended.
- On appeal the State conceded the jury instruction on receiving stolen property omitted an essential element and that charging both stealing and receiving the same property violated Miss. Code § 97-17-70(3)(a).
- The Mississippi Court of Appeals reversed the receiving-stolen-property conviction but remanded for further proceedings; the Supreme Court granted certiorari.
- The Mississippi Supreme Court held that § 97-17-70(3)(a) prohibits dual charges in a single jurisdiction and bars retrial for receiving stolen property after an acquittal for stealing the same property; it reversed and rendered judgment for Davis.
Issues
| Issue | State's Argument | Davis's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the receiving-stolen-property conviction must be reversed because jury instruction omitted an essential element | The State conceded the instruction was defective and that instruction error warranted reversal | Davis argued the instruction omission required reversal | Court accepted State’s confession; instruction omission supported reversal |
| Whether charging both stealing and receiving the same property in one jurisdiction violates § 97-17-70(3)(a) | The State admitted the dual charges violated the statute but argued (without authority) the error was harmless | Davis argued dual charges are prohibited and prevent retrial on receiving after acquittal on stealing | Court held the statute plainly forbids dual charges in a single jurisdiction and rejected harmless-error approach |
| Whether retrial for receiving-stolen-property is permissible after acquittal for stealing same property in same county | The State suggested remand for further proceedings (implying retrial) | Davis argued retrial is barred by § 97-17-70(3)(a) once tried on both theories in same jurisdiction | Court held retrial in same jurisdiction is prohibited; conviction reversed and rendered in Davis’s favor |
| Sufficiency of the evidence to support receiving conviction | The State did not defend sufficiency on appeal after confessing error on instruction and dual-charge issue | Davis maintained errors and statutory bar made conviction invalid regardless of evidence | Court resolved case on statutory bar and instruction error; did not reinstate conviction on sufficiency grounds |
Key Cases Cited
(No official-reporter case citations were relied upon in the opinion.)