Kenneth Ray Ainsworth v. State of Mississippi
236 So. 3d 820
| Miss. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Kenneth Ray Ainsworth was indicted and convicted for possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute; sentenced as a habitual offender to 20 years without parole.
- During jury deliberations the jury sent a note indicating 11 jurors found guilty of the charged offense and unanimous agreement on a lesser-included offense (possession), but no unanimity on the greater offense.
- The trial court and both parties’ counsel discussed the note on the record; defense counsel agreed to the court giving a Sharplin instruction and an agreed-upon supplemental instruction clarifying that jurors must first consider the charged offense and, if they find not guilty, then consider the lesser-included offense.
- After receiving the supplemental instructions, the jury returned a guilty verdict on the charged offense.
- Ainsworth moved unsuccessfully for a new trial or JNOV and appealed, raising error in the supplemental instruction, the court’s direction to continue deliberations, and ineffective assistance for counsel’s agreement to the instruction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred in issuing a supplemental jury instruction | Ainsworth: the supplemental instruction and Sharplin charge were improper and prejudicial | State: court acted within discretion and parties agreed to the instruction | Affirmed — no reversible error; issue procedurally barred because defense agreed and failed to object contemporaneously |
| Whether the court erred in instructing jury to continue deliberations after the jury note | Ainsworth: sending the jurors back despite their note was improper | State: continuing with proper supplemental instruction was appropriate | Affirmed — court acted within discretion and followed applicable procedure |
| Whether counsel was ineffective for agreeing to the supplemental instruction | Ainsworth: counsel’s agreement and lack of objection was deficient assistance | State: counsel’s decision was trial strategy and not ineffective | Affirmed — no ineffective-assistance showing under Strickland |
Key Cases Cited
- Sharplin v. State, 330 So. 2d 591 (Miss. 1976) (authorizes cautionary supplemental instruction to jury)
- Mickell v. State, 735 So. 2d 1031 (Miss. 1999) (abuse-of-discretion standard for supplemental instructions)
- Hughes v. State, 983 So. 2d 270 (Miss. 2008) (trial court authority to give supplemental instructions reviewed for abuse of discretion)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-part test for ineffective assistance of counsel)