290 So.3d 1261
Miss. Ct. App.2019Background
- Citizens Bank in Scooba, MS, was robbed; police shortly thereafter located a teal Lincoln containing LaBrandon Grace and his nephew and pursued/ arrested them after a vehicle and foot chase.
- A latex glove and a mask made from leggings were found in/around Grace’s car; DNA from both items matched Grace. The gun used and recorded "bait money" were recovered near where Grace was captured.
- Two bank tellers were shown photographs: both recognized Grace as a customer who had visited the bank the day before the robbery but neither could identify the disguised robber from the robbery itself.
- Grace proceeded largely pro se at trial though appointed counsel participated at various points (pretrial, start of trial, limited role during trial and instruction conference).
- A jury convicted Grace of two counts of armed robbery and felon-in-possession; he received life sentences as a non-violent habitual offender plus ten years consecutive to another sentence.
- On appeal Grace challenged (1) admission of out-of-court identifications and (2) ineffective assistance for failure to request a circumstantial-evidence instruction; the Court affirmed but permitted the ineffectiveness claim to be raised in postconviction proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Grace's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of out-of-court identifications | Single-photo identifications were impermissibly suggestive; admission violated due process | Grace failed to object at trial (procedural bar); even if suggestive, the pretrial ID did not taint any in-court ID because tellers only recognized Grace as a prior customer | Issue procedurally barred; alternatively no reversible error because witnesses only identified prior bank visit, not the robber |
| Ineffective assistance for not requesting circumstantial-evidence instruction | Trial counsel (appointed) was ineffective for failing to request a circumstantial-evidence jury instruction | Defendant largely represented himself; typically pro se defendants cannot claim ineffective assistance; record unclear whether counsel drafted/submitted the instruction | Court declined to resolve on direct appeal given mixed representation; allowed claim to be raised in a PCR petition |
Key Cases Cited
- Ronk v. State, 172 So. 3d 1112 (Miss. 2015) (single-photograph IDs are suggestive but admissibility hinges on reliability)
- Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188 (1972) (factors for assessing reliability of pretrial identifications)
- Davis v. State, 811 So. 2d 346 (Miss. 2001) (pro se defendants generally cannot complain of appointed counsel's ineffectiveness when counsel was merely on standby)
- Pace v. State, 242 So. 3d 107 (Miss. 2018) (ineffective-assistance claims are generally better developed in postconviction proceedings)