158 So. 3d 1190
Miss. Ct. App.2015Background
- On Nov. 2, 2011, Sheridan Torrance Davis encountered Marcaris Lowe at a casino; after a drug transaction they went to an apartment where Lowe was later shot four times and ultimately died of a pulmonary embolism 25 days later.
- Davis admitted shooting Lowe but claimed he acted in self-defense after Lowe allegedly produced a gun; the State argued the evidence supported deliberate-design murder (shots entered Lowe’s back; no signs of a struggle).
- Lowe identified Davis as his shooter during a 911 call and again to first responders; Lowe later died and was therefore unavailable to testify.
- Police apprehended Davis shortly after he fled; officers recovered a firearm and a small bag of cocaine on his person.
- Davis was tried and convicted of deliberate-design murder, possession of a controlled substance, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon; the court admitted Lowe’s out-of-court identifications as hearsay exceptions (dying declaration/excited utterance).
- Davis appealed, arguing insufficiency/weight of the evidence (self-defense/necessity) and erroneous admission of Lowe’s statements; the Court of Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (State) | Defendant's Argument (Davis) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence as to murder (self-defense) | Evidence (shots in back, no struggle, victim ID) disproved self-defense; a rational jury could find deliberate design | Davis claims he shot in self-defense after a struggle and the State failed to disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt | Conviction affirmed — evidence sufficient; jury could reject self-defense |
| Verdict against overwhelming weight (murder) | Jury properly weighed evidence and credibility; verdict not an unconscionable injustice | Verdict conflicts with preponderance of evidence favoring self-defense | Denied — weight challenge fails; not an exceptional case to disturb verdict |
| Verdict against overwhelming weight (firearm possession — necessity) | Jury found necessity not proved; defendant bears burden of proving necessity | Davis contends possession was necessary to prevent harm during struggle | Denied — jury reasonably rejected necessity; conviction stands |
| Admissibility of victim’s statements (hearsay exceptions) | Statements admissible as dying declarations (and alternatively excited utterances); victim was in extremis and later died | Argued victim lacked belief of imminent death and statements were not sufficiently spontaneous | Admissible; trial court did not abuse discretion in admitting as dying declarations; conviction affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Bush v. State, 895 So. 2d 836 (Miss. 2005) (standard for reviewing sufficiency and weight of evidence)
- Heidel v. State, 587 So. 2d 835 (Miss. 1991) (burden remains on State to disprove claim of self-defense)
- Miles v. State, 956 So. 2d 349 (Miss. Ct. App. 2007) (review sufficiency by viewing evidence in light most favorable to prosecution)
- Watts v. State, 492 So. 2d 1281 (Miss. 1986) (criteria for dying declaration: extremis, belief death imminent, no hope of recovery)
- Berry v. State, 611 So. 2d 924 (Miss. 1992) (test for admission under dying-declaration hearsay exception)
- Trotter v. State, 9 So. 3d 402 (Miss. Ct. App. 2008) (upholding admission of victim’s out-of-court identification as dying declaration)
- Stodghill v. State, 892 So. 2d 236 (Miss. 2005) (elements and burden for the necessity defense)