Samuel Amos v. State of Mississippi
2016-KA-01252-SCT
| Miss. | Nov 30, 2017Background
- Samuel Amos was tried and convicted in Neshoba County for the murder of Marquai Kirkland and sentenced as a habitual offender to life without parole.
- Witness Terrance Hunter testified that he rode in Amos’s Ford Explorer, heard a gunshot from the back seat, and saw Amos (aka “Red”) shoot Kirkland, then assisted Amos in leaving the scene.
- Physical evidence linked Kirkland to the Explorer (blood/DNA on the passenger-side floor), and Amos’s fingerprints and matching glass fragments were found in/from the vehicle; Kirkland’s brother identified Amos as the driver.
- Hunter initially denied involvement, later gave a detailed 2015 statement admitting his role as the driver and implicating Amos as the shooter; Hunter was never indicted and had motives to cooperate.
- At trial the defense requested an accomplice-witness cautionary jury instruction and moved for mistrial after the prosecutor asked Hunter whether he had taken a polygraph; the court denied the instruction and denied mistrial (sustaining the objection and instructing the jury to disregard the polygraph reference).
Issues
| Issue | Amos’s Argument | State’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court erred by refusing defendant’s proposed accomplice-witness cautionary instruction | Hunter was an accomplice (before/after the fact) and his testimony required a cautionary instruction | Hunter was not an accomplice or his testimony was corroborated so instruction unnecessary | Court held Hunter was an accomplice but his testimony was corroborated by other evidence; refusal was not reversible error (harmless) |
| Whether denial of mistrial after prosecutor asked whether Hunter took a polygraph deprived Amos of a fair trial | Polygraph reference impermissibly bolstered Hunter’s credibility, requiring mistrial | The reference was immediately struck; court instructed jurors to disregard; not like repeated violations in Fagan | Court held objection sustained, instructions given, and the single inadvertent reference was harmless; mistrial not required |
Key Cases Cited
- Brown v. State, 890 So. 2d 901 (discussing accomplice-witness instruction framework and analysis)
- Burke v. State, 576 So. 2d 1239 (defining accomplice and instruction necessity)
- Williams v. State, 32 So. 3d 486 (accomplice instruction required when testimony is sole uncorroborated basis for conviction)
- Williams v. State, 729 So. 2d 1181 (accomplice may be unindicted yet still be deemed an accomplice)
- Jones v. State, 203 So. 3d 600 (refusal of accomplice instruction found harmless where other evidence corroborated defendant’s participation)
- Osborne v. State, 54 So. 3d 841 (accomplice testimony may convict unless unreasonable or substantially impeached; only slight corroboration required)
- Mangum v. State, 762 So. 2d 337 (corroboration standard for accomplice testimony)
- Holmes v. State, 481 So. 2d 319 (corroboration must connect defendant to the crime)
- Burleson v. State, 166 So. 3d 499 (circumstantial evidence and instruction standards)
- Fagan v. State, 894 So. 2d 576 (reversal where prosecutor repeatedly referenced polygraph despite pretrial order)
- Weatherspoon v. State, 732 So. 2d 158 (bright-line rule: polygraph evidence and references are inadmissible)
- Smith v. State, 986 So. 2d 290 (harmless-error analysis standard; error must be evaluated in context)
- Carr v. State, 655 So. 2d 824 (polygraph results inadmissible)
- Garrett v. State, 549 So. 2d 1325 (polygraph references can be harmless depending on circumstances)
- Pennington v. State, 437 So. 2d 37 (polygraph references sometimes harmless when inadvertent)
- Alexander v. State, 749 So. 2d 1031 (defendant entitled to instructions supporting his theory when supported by evidence)