Nuckolls v. State
2015 Miss. LEXIS 586
| Miss. | 2015Background
- Indicted on thirteen counts under Miss. Code Ann. § 97-29-63; bench trial on stipulated facts with no venue details for most counts.
- Stipulation omitted where transfers occurred; filming dates and locations described, but transfer venue not specified.
- Trial court convicted all thirteen counts based on the stipulation; Nuckolls challenged ten transfer convictions and count 11’s limitations timing.
- State failed to prove venue for the transfers; some counts occurred outside the two-year statute of limitations, raising venue and limitations questions.
- Court held venue is a constitutional burden and must be proven; statute-of-limitations issue preserved for appeal; majority resolved venue and limitations issues accordingly.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was venue proven for the transfer counts? | Nuckolls contends venue failed; transfers could not be tied to DeSoto County. | State argued venue within DeSoto County based on defendant's residence. | No; State failed to prove venue for counts 1,2,5-10,12,13. |
| Did count 11 (filming) occur within the statute of limitations? | Count 11 fell outside the two-year limit based on the stipulated dates. | Stipulation and evidence could support after-Jan 2011 filming, within limit. | Yes; sufficient evidence established that filming occurred within the statute of limitations. |
Key Cases Cited
- Conner v. State, 138 So.3d 143 (Miss. 2014) (venue and statute-of-limitations considerations cited by court)
- Moreno v. State, 79 So.3d 508 (Miss. 2012) (venue may be raised on direct appeal; statutory timing context)
- Rogers v. State, 95 So.3d 623 (Miss. 2012) (constitutional venue principles in criminal cases)
- Dorsey v. State, 106 So. 827 (Miss. 1926) (historical venue and jurisdiction principles cited)