345 So.3d 610
Miss. Ct. App.2022Background
- Victim (B.L.S.) began online relationship with Willis Murray when she was 13; Murray was in his mid-40s. They exchanged sexual messages and images.
- B.L.S. testified Murray traveled from Texas to Mississippi in December 2015, entered her bedroom at night, and they had sexual intercourse while she was 15; they had additional encounters after she turned 16.
- Investigator DiMartino examined phone records, interviewed parties, and testified about B.L.S.’s statements and Murray’s admissions; recovered texts on the phone were dated in 2016 only.
- A neighbor allegedly saw an older Black man leaving the victim’s house; the victim’s mother (E.S.) relayed that out-of-court remark at trial after the court limited its use to explaining E.S.’s subsequent actions.
- Murray sought the victim’s counseling records; the trial court denied an ore tenus request to identify the counselor and granted the State’s motion in limine under MRE 412 because the defendant failed to follow Rule 412’s written-motion prerequisites.
- Jury convicted Murray of statutory rape; sentenced to 30 years. On appeal he challenged hearsay admission, denial of counseling-records discovery, and asserted ineffective assistance of counsel; the Court of Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | State's Argument | Murray's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admission of neighbor's out-of-court statement through mother (hearsay/Confrontation) | Statement not offered for truth but to explain E.S.’s actions; alternatively admissible as present-sense impression | Admission was hearsay and violated Confrontation Clause | Admission was hearsay but harmless; Confrontation claim procedurally barred and meritless because statement was non‑testimonial; conviction affirmed |
| Disclosure of victim's counseling records / identity of counselor | No duty to disclose counselor; records likely privileged and evidence of prior sexual behavior inadmissible under MRE 412 | Court erred by denying request without identifying type of counselor or conducting in camera review | Denial of ore tenus identification request upheld: defendant failed to comply with Rule 412’s written-motion requirements, so records could not be used even if produced |
| Ineffective assistance — failure to request alibi instruction | Trial strategy; defendant’s time records did not preclude possibility he committed acts as alleged | Counsel ineffective for not requesting alibi instruction | No ineffectiveness shown: evidence did not establish impossibility and omission was reasonable trial strategy |
| Ineffective assistance — failure to object to hearsay, request fuller limiting instruction, and timely pursue counseling records | Counsel's choices were strategic; many issues barred or harmless | Counsel ineffective for failing to preserve objections and timely seek records | Objections and limiting‑instruction claims were not constitutionally deficient and were harmless; claim about untimely counseling‑records pursuit dismissed without prejudice for post‑conviction review (record inadequate) |
Key Cases Cited
- Dunn v. State, 111 So. 3d 114 (Miss. Ct. App. 2013) (addressing hearsay exceptions and testimony offered to explain witness conduct)
- Roberson v. State, 61 So. 3d 204 (Miss. Ct. App. 2010) (applying MRE 412 requirements to pretrial motions for sexual-history evidence)
- Cox v. State, 849 So. 2d 1257 (Miss. 2003) (privileged records may be discoverable/admissible if relevant, material, and exculpatory)
- Chaupette v. State, 136 So. 3d 1041 (Miss. 2014) (harmless‑error standard for evidentiary rulings)
- Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (U.S. 2004) (Confrontation Clause governs testimonial statements)
- Giles v. California, 554 U.S. 353 (U.S. 2008) (distinguishing testimonial from non‑testimonial statements to friends/neighbors)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two‑prong standard for ineffective assistance of counsel)