141 So. 3d 14
Miss. Ct. App.2014Background
- In 2005 Arthur Woods was tried for statutory rape after two eighth-grade girls, "Katrina" (14) and "Amy" (15), were discovered exchanging a note alleging sex with Woods; jury convicted Woods on Katrina's count and he was sentenced to 30 years.
- At trial Katrina testified she had sex with Woods and explained earlier denials as fear and love; Amy testified inconsistently and the State dismissed Amy's count for insufficient evidence.
- In 2010 Katrina (age 21) executed an affidavit recanting her trial testimony, asserting she never had sex with Woods and that her earlier testimony had been coerced by family. Amy also later recanted in a different direction.
- The Mississippi Supreme Court granted Woods leave to file a successive PCR motion based on the recantation and ordered an evidentiary hearing.
- At the hearing before the same trial judge, Katrina testified she was truthful in 2010; the judge found her affidavit and hearing testimony not credible, recalled her 2005 testimony as credible, and noted the jury had considered alleged coercion at trial. The judge denied relief, and the appellate court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Woods) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Katrina's post-trial recantation warrants a new trial / PCR relief | Recanted affidavit is newly discovered evidence that proves trial testimony false and entitles Woods to a new trial | Recantation is unreliable; credibility was for the trial judge to decide and prior trial record already addressed coercion and credibility | Denied. Court held recantation required an evidentiary hearing but judge properly found the recantation not credible and refused a new trial |
Key Cases Cited
- Yarborough v. State, 514 So.2d 1215 (Miss. 1987) (courts skeptical of recanted testimony and require careful review)
- Russell v. State, 849 So.2d 95 (Miss. 2003) (a changed witness statement alone is not adequate ground for new trial)
- Rushing v. State, 873 So.2d 116 (Miss. Ct. App. 2004) (recantation entitles petitioner to evidentiary hearing so trial court can assess credibility)
- Howell v. State, 989 So.2d 372 (Miss. 2008) (trial court may deny new trial when not satisfied recantation is true)
- Woods v. State, 973 So.2d 1022 (Miss. Ct. App. 2008) (direct appeal affirming Woods’s conviction; prior discussion of credibility and jury consideration of coercion)