143 So. 3d 543
Miss. Ct. App.2013Background
- Matthews (father) had scheduled custody of his daughter Wednesday night to Thursday morning under chancery-court order.
- On May 26, 2011, Matthews returned the child to the mother’s residence; an altercation occurred when Pam Sullivan (mother’s mother) opened the car door to unbuckle the child and Matthews slammed the door, pinning Pam and causing bruising and pain.
- Pam reported the assault; police were summoned; Officer Wigley ordered Matthews back to his vehicle and ordered him not to use his cell phone while officers investigated.
- Matthews refused the phone order and was arrested for disorderly conduct; Pam filed an affidavit charging simple assault based on being pinned in the car door.
- Matthews was convicted in municipal court, lost a bench trial de novo in county court (simple assault and disorderly conduct), and the circuit court affirmed; Matthews appealed to the Mississippi Supreme Court.
Issues
| Issue | Matthews' Argument | City/Prosecution's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for simple assault | Conduct justified under castle doctrine to prevent kidnapping of child; insufficient proof of assault elements | Evidence showed he pinned Pam causing pain and bruising, satisfying assault elements | Affirmed conviction; insufficient evidence to invoke castle doctrine; facts support assault conviction |
| Weight of the evidence for simple assault | Verdict against the overwhelming weight; alleged lack of proof of bodily injury | Victim testified to pain, bruising, and scraped finger—supports bodily injury element | Affirmed; not an unconscionable injustice to let verdict stand |
| Sufficiency of evidence for disorderly conduct | Ordered not to use phone; argued the order was unreasonable or insufficient to support conviction | Officer ordered him to refrain from phone use for safety during investigation; refusal justified disorderly-conduct arrest | Affirmed conviction; jury could find beyond reasonable doubt that he disobeyed a lawful order |
| Exclusion of police dispatch report | Trial court improperly excluded dispatch report produced earlier by City; reciprocal disclosure issue | Report was excluded for nondisclosure; error was harmless because Matthews testified to its contents | Affirmed; exclusion violated rule but was harmless — no miscarriage of justice |
Key Cases Cited
- Griffin v. State, 760 So.2d 865 (Miss. Ct. App. 2000) (standard for reviewing JNOV and directed verdict)
- Tait v. State, 669 So.2d 85 (Miss. 1996) (defendant’s challenge to sufficiency via JNOV explained)
- May v. State, 460 So.2d 778 (Miss. 1984) (court must view all evidence in light most favorable to State on sufficiency review)
- Hughes v. State, 983 So.2d 270 (Miss. 2008) (reversal only when facts/inferences favor defendant on any element)
- Murrell v. State, 655 So.2d 881 (Miss. 1995) (State must prove victim suffered bodily injury)
- Reynolds v. State, 818 So.2d 1287 (Miss. Ct. App. 2002) (discusses need for proof of injury beyond a glancing blow)
- Bush v. State, 895 So.2d 836 (Miss. 2005) (standard for weighing evidence on motion for new trial)
- Payton v. State, 897 So.2d 921 (Miss. 2003) (URCCC discovery violation harmless only if no miscarriage of justice)