369 So.3d 588
Miss. Ct. App.2023Background
- On June 15, 2018, Truitt Pace called 911 and admitted to shooting his wife, Marsha; he initially said he had punched her and later said he shot her during an "argument."
- Officers found Marsha alive but gravely injured with a gunshot wound to the left rear side of the head; brain matter and blood were on the bed; a .380 pistol, magazine, casing, and unspent rounds were recovered.
- Forensic pathologist concluded the gun was fired from beyond two to three feet and that manner of death was homicide; Dr. LeVaughn also identified separate blunt facial injuries and healed bruising.
- The State presented testimony and prior-domestic-violence evidence (including 2016 photographs and witnesses describing prior abuse and statements by Pace about shooting her in the head); Pace claimed the shooting was accidental/self-defense and did not testify.
- A jury convicted Pace of first-degree murder; he was sentenced to life imprisonment and appealed, raising sufficiency/weight of evidence, admission of prior-incident photos, prosecutorial closing comments, refusal of a self-defense instruction, and cumulative-error claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Pace) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of the evidence (deliberate design) | Evidence does not show intent to kill; shooting was accidental or defensive. | 911 admission, use of a deadly weapon, distance of shot, prior threats/abuse support deliberate design. | Affirmed: evidence sufficient for deliberate design; jury could infer intent from circumstances. |
| Weight of the evidence / new trial | Verdict is against the overwhelming weight; self-defense evidence weighs against conviction. | Credibility and weight properly for jury; medical and scene evidence support conviction. | Affirmed: trial court did not abuse discretion denying new trial; verdict not against overwhelming weight. |
| Admission of February 2016 photographs | Photos were prejudicial, remote, and lacked proper foundation; inadmissible character evidence. | Photos admissible under Rule 404(b) to show motive, intent, absence of accident, and pattern of domestic violence. | Error in foundation/admission but harmless given overwhelming evidence; no reversal. |
| Defense counsel comment re: absent child witness (K.P.) | Noted child was present but not called; implied State's failure to call key witness. | Comment improper because both parties had equal access to witness. | Court properly sustained objection; counsel did not show State had greater access. |
| State's rebuttal comment about not calling K.P. | (Raised on appeal) Prosecutor’s remarks shifted burden. | State said it exercised its own discretion not to call child; defense failed to object at trial. | Procedurally barred on appeal (no contemporaneous objection). |
| Refusal of self-defense jury instruction (D-8) | D-8 tracked model instruction and should have been given to present defense theory. | Court’s given instructions (C-8, C-4) adequately covered self-defense and presumption of innocence. | No abuse of discretion; instructions read as a whole fairly announced law. |
| Cumulative error | Multiple errors combined deprived Pace of a fair trial. | Only one marginal error (photos), which was harmless; evidence overwhelming. | Rejected: cumulative-error claim fails given harmlessness and strong evidence. |
Key Cases Cited
- Holland v. State, 290 So. 3d 754 (Miss. Ct. App. 2020) (distinguishes sufficiency vs. weight-of-evidence review)
- Sanford v. State, 247 So. 3d 1242 (Miss. 2018) (sufficiency review is de novo)
- Brooks v. State, 203 So. 3d 1134 (Miss. 2016) (standards for appellate review of convictions)
- Wayne v. State, 337 So. 3d 704 (Miss. Ct. App. 2022) (new-trial/weight-of-evidence standard)
- Hammock v. State, 379 So. 2d 323 (Miss. 1980) (deliberation/malice requirement for murder)
- Collins v. State, 221 So. 3d 366 (Miss. Ct. App. 2016) (intent may be inferred from acts and circumstances)
- Holliman v. State, 178 So. 3d 689 (Miss. 2015) (deliberate design can be inferred from use of deadly weapon)
- Stringer v. State, 500 So. 2d 928 (Miss. 1986) (photograph admission and prejudice analysis)
- Ambrose v. State, 254 So. 3d 77 (Miss. 2018) (harmless-error analysis where evidence is overwhelming)
- Moberg v. State, 303 So. 3d 815 (Miss. Ct. App. 2020) (abuse-of-discretion standard for evidentiary rulings)
- McGilberry v. State, 741 So. 2d 894 (Miss. 1999) (criteria for evidentiary value of photographs)
- Carter v. State, 288 So. 3d 397 (Miss. Ct. App. 2019) (Rule 404(b) use for domestic-violence proof)
- Marbra v. State, 904 So. 2d 1169 (Miss. Ct. App. 2004) (testimony of prior domestic violence admissible under Rule 404(b))
- Moss v. State, 727 So. 2d 720 (Miss. Ct. App. 1998) (similar Rule 404(b) principle)
- Ross v. State, 603 So. 2d 857 (Miss. 1992) (comments on absent witnesses and equal accessibility presumption)
- Ross v. State, 954 So. 2d 968 (Miss. 2007) (cumulative-error doctrine)
- Madlock v. State, 440 So. 2d 315 (Miss. 1983) (presumption of equal access to witnesses)
- Gales v. State, 299 So. 3d 861 (Miss. Ct. App. 2020) (preservation requirement for appellate review of objections)
- McNeer v. State, 307 So. 3d 508 (Miss. Ct. App. 2020) (abuse-of-discretion review for jury-instruction rulings)
- Hearn v. State, 3 So. 3d 722 (Miss. 2008) (court may refuse instructions that are covered elsewhere or unsupported)