143 So. 3d 636
Miss. Ct. App.2014Background
- Moe Wright was murdered March 6, 2012; Luster was charged with Moe’s murder along with co-defendants Davis and Hunt.
- Police found shell casings and Moe’s body; .40 caliber shell casing found, indicating a .40 caliber weapon.
- Luster voluntarily turned himself in March 7, 2012, claiming he was in Vidalia, Louisiana with Alexis Williams at the time of the homicide.
- Alexis testified Luster confessed to killing Moe and described the sequence of events; she later recanted, then recanted again under coercion, leading to reasserted incriminating information.
- Hunt and Davis testified that they saw Luster shoot Moe; Davis testified Luster compelled him to shoot, and Luster allegedly returned the gun.
- Luster was found guilty of murder and sentenced to life; a motion for new trial or JNOV was denied; Luster appeals on weight of the evidence, ineffective assistance of counsel, and plain error regarding jury instruction S-1.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the verdict was against the overwhelming weight of the evidence | Luster argues weight supports manslaughter not murder | State argues verdict not against the overwhelming weight | No merit; verdict upheld |
| Whether trial counsel was ineffective | Counsel failed to object to S-1 and failed to request cautionary instruction for co-defendants | Record does not conclusively show ineffective assistance; needs post-conviction review | No reversal on direct appeal; affirmed without prejudice to post-conviction review |
| Whether plain error occurred with jury instruction S-1 | S-1 allowed conviction on an element not charged in the indictment | S-1 did not change elements of murder | No plain error; instruction did not alter required elements; affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Bush v. State, 895 So.2d 836 (Miss. 2005) (weight-of-the-evidence standard for new-trial motions; deference to jury)
- Langston v. State, 791 So.2d 273 (Miss.Ct.App.2001) (reweighing evidence not allowed on weight claim)
- Parham v. State, 229 So.2d 582 (Miss.1969) (duty to correct inadequate representation; standard for ineffectiveness on direct appeal)
- Colenburg v. State, 735 So.2d 1099 (Miss.Ct.App.1999) (direct-appeal ineffectiveness review constraints)
- Blunt v. State, 55 So.3d 207 (Miss.Ct.App.2011) (plain-error standard; manifest miscarriage of justice)