Keith Friston v. State of Mississippi
243 So. 3d 198
| Miss. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- On Aug. 17, 2013 a car crashed into a brick wall in Clarksdale; passenger Valerie West died and Norman Williams was injured. Officer Woodward did not find the driver at the scene; Williams identified Keith Friston as the driver.
- Friston was located nearby, taken to the hospital; blood tests showed Friston .19 BAC and presence of marijuana; Williams tested positive for marijuana and negative for alcohol.
- Two days later Friston gave a statement admitting he was driving; at trial he testified Williams was driving and said his prior admission was to protect Williams.
- First trial in Nov. 2014 ended in mistrial when the State’s forensic pathologist (Dr. Barnhart) could not testify due to illness; retrial held Feb. 2015.
- At retrial Dr. Barnhart testified West died of blunt force trauma from the crash; Friston was convicted of aggravated DUI (DUI death) and felony leaving the scene, sentenced as a habitual offender to concurrent 25 and 20-year terms (25 years total) plus fines.
- On appeal Friston challenged (1) retrial as double jeopardy due to mistrial, (2) exclusion of witness Lew Houston’s testimony, and (3) jury instructions/constructive amendment of the indictment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether retrial after the State‑moved mistrial violated double jeopardy | Friston: mistrial was not manifestly necessary; retrial barred | State/Court: pathologist’s testimony was necessary to prove causal link between crash and death; mistrial manifestly necessary | Court: affirmed — mistrial manifestly necessary; retrial did not violate double jeopardy (court did not abuse discretion) |
| Whether trial court erred by excluding Houston’s prior trial testimony / denying calling him to testify substantively | Friston: exclusion prevented presentation of defense and impeachment; Houston’s prior testimony would support Friston’s theory | State/Court: prior inconsistent testimony may impeach but cannot be used as substantive evidence; Houston was available so former‑testimony hearsay exception inapplicable | Court: affirmed — no abuse of discretion; court properly prevented use of prior testimony as substantive evidence; exclusion proper under rules of evidence |
| Whether jury instructions constructively amended the indictment by omitting the specific negligent act alleged (running off the roadway into a wall) | Friston: instruction failed to require jury to find the specific negligent act in the indictment, altering elements and constructively amending charge | State/Court: aggravated DUI requires proof of negligent causation of death, not proof of a specific act; instructions read together adequately set out elements | Court: affirmed — issue procedurally barred for lack of objection, and merits fail; instructions did not constructively amend indictment |
Key Cases Cited
- Whitaker v. State, 114 So. 3d 725 (Miss. Ct. App. 2012) (trial judge discretion to declare mistrial)
- Jenkins v. State, 759 So. 2d 1229 (Miss. 2000) (double jeopardy and manifest necessity standard)
- Watts v. State, 492 So. 2d 1281 (Miss. 1986) (manifest necessity discussion)
- Leslie v. State, 171 So. 3d 549 (Miss. Ct. App. 2015) (existence of alternatives does not bar retrial)
- Clark v. State, 40 So. 3d 531 (Miss. 2010) (defendant’s right to present defense subject to evidence rules)
- Carothers v. State, 152 So. 3d 277 (Miss. 2014) (limitations on impeachment to prevent subterfuge)
- Brown v. State, 556 So. 2d 338 (Miss. 1990) (prior inconsistent sworn statements cannot be used as substantive evidence)
- Graham v. State, 185 So. 3d 992 (Miss. 2016) (constructive amendment standard — whether elements of proof are substantially altered)
- Andino v. State, 125 So. 3d 700 (Miss. Ct. App. 2013) (elements of DUI homicide: intoxication or .08+ BAC and negligent causation of death)