Melvin Hare v. State of Mississippi
2016-KA-00046-COA
| Miss. Ct. App. | Jun 20, 2017Background
- On Aug. 26, 2013, Melvin Hare and Lubertha Sims were at Sims’s home when Roy Clark (Sims’s ex) arrived, ripped a screen door, threatened Hare, and engaged him in a fight.
- During the struggle Hare pulled a knife and stabbed Clark multiple times; Clark later collapsed, was hospitalized, and died from numerous stab wounds.
- Hare admitted to stabbing Clark; the defense was self‑defense (fear of Clark), and Hare had some health issues limiting his strength.
- Hare was tried in Warren County Circuit Court; the jury was instructed on depraved‑heart murder, culpable‑negligence manslaughter, and self‑defense, and returned a verdict of depraved‑heart murder.
- Hare appealed, raising ineffective assistance of counsel (failure to request a heat‑of‑passion manslaughter instruction), insufficiency of the evidence, and that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction and sentence (30 years, 25 to serve), dismissing the ineffective‑assistance claim without prejudice and rejecting Hare’s sufficiency and weight arguments; one judge dissented, arguing the court should have instructed on heat‑of‑passion manslaughter.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance of counsel for not submitting heat‑of‑passion instruction and allowing State’s culpable‑negligence instruction | Hare: counsel was ineffective for failing to request heat‑of‑passion manslaughter instruction | State/Court: record does not affirmatively show constitutional ineffectiveness; issue more appropriate for postconviction review | Dismissed without prejudice to collateral review; appellate court declined to decide ineffective‑assistance claim on direct appeal |
| Trial court’s duty to give heat‑of‑passion instruction sua sponte | Hare (via dissent): court should have instructed jury on heat‑of‑passion manslaughter because evidence supported it | Majority: record lacks evidence of an emotionally inflamed, uncontrollable rage required for heat‑of‑passion; defendant’s theory was fear/self‑defense | Majority: no duty to give heat‑of‑passion instruction; dissent would reverse and remand |
| Sufficiency of the evidence for depraved‑heart murder | Hare: evidence supports self‑defense; conviction not supported | State: Hare admitted stabbing; multiple and defensive wounds on victim; injuries inconsistent with self‑defense claim | Affirmed: evidence sufficient for jury to find depraved‑heart murder beyond reasonable doubt |
| Weight of the evidence (new trial) | Hare: verdict is against overwhelming weight and self‑defense was supported | State: factual disputes were for jury; evidence viewed most favorably to verdict supports conviction | Affirmed: not an unconscionable injustice to allow verdict to stand |
Key Cases Cited
- Wilcher v. State, 863 So. 2d 776 (Miss. 2003) (direct‑appeal limits on addressing ineffective assistance absent an adequate record)
- Bush v. State, 895 So. 2d 836 (Miss. 2005) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence and weight‑of‑evidence relief)
- Nolan v. State, 61 So. 3d 887 (Miss. 2011) (reiterating legal sufficiency review standard)
- McCune v. State, 989 So. 2d 310 (Miss. 2008) (elements and definition of heat‑of‑passion manslaughter)
- Guster v. State, 758 So. 2d 1086 (Miss. Ct. App. 2000) (trial court duty to conform jury instructions to the evidence)
- Manuel v. State, 667 So. 2d 590 (Miss. 1995) (trial courts should instruct on defendant’s defense theories supported by the evidence)
- Ealey v. State, 158 So. 3d 283 (Miss. 2015) (factual disputes are for the jury; weight‑of‑evidence standard)