McInnis v. State, 2011 Miss. LEXIS 196

McInnis was convicted of burglary of a dwelling in Mississippi; certiorari granted to review the conviction.
Victim Hillary Kissenger, 84, testified she woke to an intruder in her bedroom, saw a black male in a white T‑shirt, and purse theft occurred.
Police stopped a black male in a car on Thirty‑third Street; officer identified McInnis as the driver shortly after Kissenger’s 911 call.
Three purses and Kissenger’s wallet were found in the car, and Kissenger later identified the purse and envelopes as hers.
McInnis denied burglary and claimed he was on Thirty‑second Street; Armstrong, a passenger, testified inconsistent details; detective statements included an alleged hustling remark.
Court of Appeals held the trial court properly denied a two‑theory instruction, relying on what it viewed as direct evidence; the supreme court granted certiorari to address the instruction issue.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred by not giving a two‑theory instruction.	McInnis argued the record warranted a two‑theory instruction because the evidence was not purely direct.	The State contends the circumstantial‑evidence framework covers such cases and a separate two‑theory instruction is not required when other circumstantial guidance is given.	Yes; the court held reversible error for denying the two‑theory instruction.

Kirkwood v. State, 52 So.3d 1184 (Miss. 2011) (circurstancial vs direct-evidence distinction applied to burden shifts)
Montgomery v. State, 515 So.2d 845 (Miss. 1987) (concurring opinion on circumstantial-evidence burden rules)
Davis v. State, 18 So.3d 842 (Miss. 2009) (circumstantial evidence rules and instructions framework)
Jackson v. State, 815 So.2d 1196 (Miss. 2002) (authority on circumstantial-evidence instruction standards)
Stringfellow v. State, 595 So.2d 1320 (Miss. 1992) (cited for how circumstantial instructions relate to reasonable-doubt standard)