Richard White v. State of Mississippi
2016 Miss. LEXIS 281
| Miss. | 2016Background
- On Jan. 29, 2012, intruder entered Newell and Johanna Inman’s unlocked storage room off their carport; Newell was beaten with a metal object and later identified Richard White from a photograph; tools were missing from the storage room.
- A fingerprint from the storage-room box matched White’s left middle finger; White denied involvement and offered an uncorroborated alibi.
- White was tried on Count I: burglary of a dwelling (charged as breaking and entering with intent to commit larceny and/or assault) and Count II: aggravated assault (separately instructed).
- The jury was instructed that burglary required breaking and entering with intent to commit “larceny and/or assault,” but the instructions did not define larceny; the jury was instructed on aggravated assault elements.
- Jury convicted White of burglary and acquitted him of aggravated assault; the Court of Appeals affirmed; this Court granted certiorari and affirmed, relying on Windless v. State.
Issues
| Issue | White's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether omission of a definition/instruction for larceny in the burglary instruction was reversible error | Trial court erred by failing to instruct the jury on larceny elements; jury had no basis to determine intent to commit larceny | No plain error: “larceny” is commonly understood as theft and, given the evidence, the jury could determine intent without a formal larceny definition | Affirmed: omission not plain error; jury fairly instructed overall and evidence supported intent to steal |
| Whether an instruction on the elements of the intended crime is required to prove burglary intent | Jury must be instructed on elements of intended crime (per Conner) | Not required where the intended crime is commonly understood and evidence supports intent (per Windless) | Majority: not required here; dissent would require element instruction |
Key Cases Cited
- Windless v. State, 185 So.3d 956 (Miss. 2015) (plurality held omission of a larceny definition in burglary-related instruction was not plain error where larceny is commonly understood and evidence supported intent)
- Conner v. State, 138 So.3d 143 (Miss. 2014) (trial courts should instruct jury on elements of the intended crime in burglary trials when necessary to fairly instruct jury)
- Daniels v. State, 107 So.3d 961 (Miss. 2013) (State need not prove every element of the intended crime to convict for burglary; only intent must be proven)
- Booker v. State, 716 So.2d 1064 (Miss. 1998) (burglary is a single offense whose second element is intent to commit some crime therein)
- Moore v. State, 344 So.2d 731 (Miss. 1977) (only intent need be proven as the second element of burglary)
- White v. State, 195 So.3d 801 (Miss. Ct. App. 2015) (Court of Appeals affirmed burglary conviction; case below summarized and affirmed by Mississippi Supreme Court)