Plessy v. State
2012 Ark. App. 74
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Quincy Plessy was tried in Sebastian County for first-degree murder and a firearm-enhancement; the jury convicted him and sentenced him to 420 months total.
- Thomas Xavier Clayton was shot at an Fort Smith location on Nov 30, 2009 and died within an hour at St. Edward’s Hospital.
- Plessy was charged by information on Dec 8, 2009; the State filed notice on Mar 1, 2011 to amend to include a felony-firearm enhancement; the amended information was filed Apr 13, 2011.
- Trial occurred Apr 18–20, 2011; the jury found Plessy guilty of first-degree murder and imposed a 360-month term plus a five-year firearm enhancement.
- Plessy appealed asserting sufficiency of the evidence, improper late amendment of the information, denial of a mistrial, admissibility of a dying declaration, and admission of photographs; the appellate court affirmed on all points.
- The key issues involve whether evidence was sufficient given accomplice corroboration, whether the information could be amended late, whether prosecutorial conduct required a mistrial, whether Clayton’s statement qualifies as a dying declaration, and whether the photographs were properly admitted.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the evidence not preserved | Plessy contends lack of corroboration for accomplice Gibson requires reversal. | State argues directed-verdict grounds not properly preserved; grounds not specified. | Not reviewable; failure to specify deficiency in directed-verdict motion |
| Timeliness and effect of information amendment | Amendment changed the nature of the charge and prejudiced Plessy. | Amendment did not change the nature/degree; allowed before trial; notice supported. | Amendment proper; no unfair prejudice; charge remained the same |
| Mistrial due to prosecutorial misconduct over letter question | Prosecutor’s questioning was prejudicial; justification for mistrial. | Court properly handled; cautionary measures available; no fundamental unfairness. | No abuse of discretion; no mandatory mistrial |
| Admissibility of dying declaration | Clayton’s statements to witnesses were unreliable due to inconsistencies. | Dying declaration requires belief of imminent death; statements admissible. | Admissible; statements satisfied dying-declaration criteria |
| Admission of photographs | Photos are prejudicial and lack probative value. | Photographs aid understanding and are probative. | Admission not an abuse of discretion; photographs admissible |
Key Cases Cited
- Hill v. State, 370 Ark. 102, 257 S.W.3d 534 (2007) (allowable amendment of information before trial or after case-specific timing)
- Nelson v. State, 84 Ark.App. 373, 141 S.W.3d 900 (2004) (corroboration and evidentiary standards for accomplice testimony)
- Tillman v. State, 364 Ark. 143, 217 S.W.3d 773 (2005) (reaffirming evidentiary standards and review limits)
- Boone v. State, 282 Ark. 274, 668 S.W.2d 17 (1984) (general guidance on evidence and trial discretion)
- Simsphins v. State, 48 Ark.App. 14, 889 S.W.2d 37 (1994) (application of corroboration rules)
- Springs v. State, 368 Ark. 256, 244 S.W.3d 683 (2006) (photographs admissibility and probative value)
- Parker v. State, 292 Ark. 421, 731 S.W.2d 756 (1987) (general evidentiary standards relevant to this case)
- Jones v. State, 340 Ark. 390, 10 S.W.3d 449 (2000) (standards for admission of physical evidence)