Melvin Potts v. State of Mississippi
233 So. 3d 782
| Miss. | 2017Background
- Victim Garrick Shelton was found dead in his Madison County home; evidence included a bullet, a metallic fragment in the skull, 18 stab wounds, a bloody knife, broken glasses, and missing items (car, phone, TV, game console).
- Police developed Melvin Potts as a suspect after his mother’s number appeared in Shelton’s phone records; neighbors reported Potts had a bandaged hand and was driving a broken-down car.
- Potts was arrested; during interviews he gave multiple, inconsistent accounts admitting he shot Shelton, stabbed him, and took Shelton’s car and electronics; he also claimed self-defense after being cut.
- Forensics tied Shelton’s blood to the bloody knife and Potts’s blood to droplets at the scene; medical examiner concluded death resulted from sharp-force injuries (stab wounds) and found a metallic fragment in the skull.
- At trial the jury was instructed on first-degree murder, second-degree murder, heat-of-passion manslaughter, and imperfect-self-defense manslaughter; Potts was convicted of first-degree murder (life) and motor-vehicle theft (10 years concurrent).
- Potts appealed, raising claims about the trial judge answering a jury question (and not declaring a mistrial), several instruction rulings (granted/refused), and sufficiency/weight of the evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Potts) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether judge erred in responding to jury question / should have declared mistrial | Judge erred by providing additional instruction and failing to declare mistrial when jury said deadlocked | Foreperson’s remark was personal, not a jury deadlock; the court’s answer was agreed by both parties and Potts failed to contemporaneously object | No error; foreperson not speaking for entire jury; failure to object forfeited issue on appeal |
| Validity of Instruction 8 (acquit-first including charged + all lesser offenses in one instruction) | Instruction caused misconception of law by combining charges and lesser-included offenses | Language tracked elements accurately; similar acquit-first instructions have been approved | No error; permissible and accurately tracked elements |
| Refusal of Potts’s malice aforethought instruction (D–2) and grant of C–7 (deliberate design) | Needed malice definition as proffered | C–7 adequately defined deliberate design and equated it to malice aforethought | No error; deliberate design instruction covered malice aforethought |
| Sufficiency and weight of evidence supporting first-degree murder conviction | Evidence insufficient / verdict against overwhelming weight (Potts claimed self-defense) | Forensics, Potts’s admissions, opportunity to leave, and post-killing conduct support finding of deliberate design and guilt beyond reasonable doubt | No error; viewing evidence favorably to State, a rational juror could find guilt beyond reasonable doubt; verdict not against overwhelming weight |
Key Cases Cited
- Sharplin v. State, 330 So. 2d 591 (trial judge may instruct jury to continue deliberations when unable to reach unanimous verdict)
- Bush v. State, 895 So. 2d 836 (standard for reviewing sufficiency and weight of the evidence)
- Fulgham v. State, 46 So. 3d 315 (approving similar acquit-first language)
- Tran v. State, 681 So. 2d 514 (malice aforethought and deliberate design are synonymous)
- Roby v. State, 183 So. 3d 857 (abuse-of-discretion standard for jury instructions)
- Hall v. State, 201 So. 3d 425 (contemporaneous objection requirement to preserve error on appeal)