Justin Lee Anderson v. State of Mississippi, 361 So.3d 609

On Sept. 7, 2018, Justin Anderson and Michael McLendon, who had been using drugs and "playing with a gun," were on a grassy knoll between Newk’s and Red Lobster in Hattiesburg when a single gunshot fatally wounded McLendon.
Bystanders (restaurant employees and panhandlers) heard loud talking, a sound like a firecracker or gunshot, and then saw people run; Rosemary (McLendon’s friend) immediately accused Anderson of shooting McLendon.
Officers found an unloaded .22 handgun at the scene; forensic testing linked the bullets to that gun; the medical examiner ruled the death a homicide from a gunshot to the head.
At the police station Anderson spontaneously told Detective Dunaway he had "shot somebody in the head;" officers also read Miranda rights and Anderson later refused to sign a waiver.
At trial the jury received instructions on first‑degree murder and lesser included offenses (second‑degree, culpable negligence); the court refused Anderson’s proposed heat‑of‑passion manslaughter instruction; jury convicted Anderson of first‑degree murder and sentenced him to life.
On appeal Anderson argued (1) the trial court erred by denying a heat‑of‑passion instruction, (2) plain error in admitting his confession (intoxication/Miranda), and (3) the verdict was against the overwhelming weight of the evidence; the Supreme Court of Mississippi affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Trial court erred by refusing heat‑of‑passion manslaughter instruction	Anderson: evidence of a heated/ escalating confrontation and witnesses saying McLendon "wouldn’t leave me alone" supports heat of passion	State: evidence showed only loud talking/words; no provocation or physical blow to trigger heat of passion	Denial affirmed — words alone insufficient; no evidence of sudden violent rage or immediate provocation that would reduce murder to manslaughter
Admission of confession (Miranda/intoxication) — plain error review	Anderson: intoxicated and thus unable to understand rights; confession involuntary, should be excluded	State: statement was spontaneous, defendant conversed coherently, invoked rights later; intoxication does not automatically invalidate a confession	No plain error — trial record shows voluntary, comprehensible statement; even if error, admission was cumulative and not prejudicial
Verdict against overwhelming weight of the evidence	Anderson: facts support manslaughter/culpable negligence; jury had to choose between acquittal or murder	State: physical evidence, witnesses, confession, and circumstantial evidence support deliberate design and murder conviction	Affirmed — drawing all inferences for the State, conviction not so contrary to overwhelming weight as to constitute manifest injustice

Gilmore v. State, 119 So. 3d 278 (Miss. 2013) (denial of lesser‑included instruction reviewed de novo and requires some evidentiary basis)
Quinn v. State, 191 So. 3d 1227 (Miss. 2016) (abuse‑of‑discretion standard for instruction rulings)
McCune v. State, 989 So. 2d 310 (Miss. 2008) (definition of heat of passion and required provocation)
Phillips v. State, 794 So. 2d 1034 (Miss. 2001) (words alone are insufficient to establish heat of passion)
Tait v. State, 669 So. 2d 85 (Miss. 1996) (fact pattern distinguishing accidental/horseplay killings from heat of passion; culpable negligence context)
O’Halloran v. State, 731 So. 2d 565 (Miss. 1999) (intoxication does not automatically render a confession involuntary; admissibility depends on degree of intoxication)
Moore v. State, 237 So. 2d 844 (Miss. 1970) (confession admissible if defendant fully understood and statements were voluntary)
Bernard v. State, 288 So. 3d 301 (Miss. 2019) (deliberate design may be formed quickly and may be inferred from use of a deadly weapon)