Havard v. State

• Citation: 312 So.3d 326
• Decision Date: 17 December 2020
• Docket Number: NO. 2018-CA-01709-SCT,2018-CA-01709-SCT
• Parties: Jeffrey HAVARD a/k/a Jeffrey Keith Havard v. STATE of Mississippi
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi

312 So.3d 326

Jeffrey HAVARD a/k/a Jeffrey Keith Havard

v.STATE of Mississippi

NO. 2018-CA-01709-SCT

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

December 17, 2020

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: GRAHAM P. CARNER, MARK D. JICKA, CAROLINE K. IVANOV, Jackson

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, BY: BRAD A. SMITH, ASHLEY LAUREN SULSER

EN BANC.

COLEMAN, JUSTICE, FOR THE COURT:

¶1. An Adams County jury convicted Jeffery Keith Havard of capital murder and sentenced him to death. The Court granted Havard's third petition for post-conviction relief and allowed him to proceed in the trial court based on his claim that newly discovered evidence pertaining to shaken-baby syndrome required a new trial and vacating his death sentence.

¶2. After an evidentiary hearing, the trial judge determined that Havard failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that new evidence existed that would have caused a different result as to his guilt or innocence. But the trial judge did vacate Havard's death sentence and resentenced him to life without parole. Now, Havard appeals the trial judge's denial of a new trial. We affirm.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

¶3. The following facts are taken from the Court's decision after considering Havard's second motion for post-conviction relief:

Havard was living in Adams County with his girlfriend, Rebecca Britt, the mother of the victim, six-month-old Chloe Britt. Havard was not Chloe's father. Havard and Britt had been dating for a few months when Britt and Chloe moved in with Havard. On February 21, 2002, at approximately 8:00 p.m., Havard gave Britt some money and asked her to get supper from the grocery store. When Britt returned home, she found that Chloe had been bathed and was asleep. Havard told Britt he had given Chloe her bath and put her to bed. Havard had also stripped the sheets off the bed and told Britt he was washing them. Britt testified that, before that night, Havard had never bathed Chloe or changed her diaper.

Britt testified that she checked on Chloe and she seemed fine. Havard then insisted that Britt go back out to the video store to rent some movies. Britt further testified that when she returned, Havard was in the bathroom with the door shut. She then went to check on Chloe and found the baby was blue and no longer breathing. Britt attempted to resuscitate Chloe by CPR before Britt and Havard drove Chloe to Natchez Community Hospital, where Britt's mother worked. The child was pronounced dead at the hospital later that night.

The pathologist[, Dr. Steven Hayne,] prepared Chloe's autopsy report [and] testified that some of Chloe's injuries were consistent with penetration of the rectum with an object. Chloe's other injuries included abrasions and bruises inside her mouth. The baby also had internal bleeding inside her skull that was consistent with shaken-baby syndrome

....

Havard was later charged with capital murder with sexual battery being the underlying felony. Two days after Chloe's death, Havard gave a videotaped statement, in which he denied committing sexual battery on Chloe. He claimed that he accidentally dropped her against the commode after giving her a bath, shook her in a panic, and then rubbed her down with lavender lotion before putting her to bed .

Havard v. State , 86 So. 3d 896, 898–99 (¶¶ 2–5) (Miss. 2012) ( Havard III ) (emphasis added).

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

¶4. Havard has been on death row since he was found guilty of capital murder (killing during the commission of sexual battery) of six-month-old Chloe Britt in 2002. Our Court affirmed Havard's conviction and sentence on direct appeal. Havard v. State , 928 So. 2d 771, 778 (¶ 1) (Miss. 2006) ( Havard I ). Our Court denied Havard's first two post-conviction applications. Havard v. State , 988 So. 2d 322, 325 (¶ 1) (Miss. 2008) ( Havard II ); Havard III , 86 So. 3d at 898 (¶ 1) (Miss. 2012).

¶5. On November 25, 2013, Havard filed his third petition for post-conviction relief in our Court. Havard presented one ground, and one ground only:

Newly-discovered evidence demonstrates that the cause and manner of death of Chloe Britt was not Shaken Baby Syndrome, as was testified to at Havard's trial. Newly-discovered evidence of advances in the scientific and medical fields since Havard's trial demonstrates that the testimony presented at trial concerning Shaken Baby Syndrome is ill-founded and no longer supported by the scientific and medical communities. In light of these circumstances, Petitioner's conviction and death sentence violate due process and constitute a manifest injustice that this Court is empowered to correct by way of post-conviction relief. Petitioner is entitled to have this claim and the factual basis of the claim fully explored in proceedings in this court. This ground for relief has not previously been raised in Mississippi's state courts. because the factual grounds for the claim were not discovered until recently and could not have been discovered with reasonable diligence. This claim also involves a fundamental right.

¶6. Havard's petition continued, explaining that "[n ]ewly-discovered evidence demonstrates that the basis for the State's theory of murder–the mode and mechanism of death, Shaken Baby Syndrome–is flawed. " And Havard asserted that new scientific evidence increases the probability that Chloe's actual cause and manner of death were blunt force trauma caused by an accidental drop rather than shaken-baby syndrome

caused by violent shaking.

¶7. Havard's petition further alleged, quoting an affidavit from one of his medical experts, that since his "trial in 2002, ‘the medical community has begun to accept a number of alternative explanations that can account for deaths that would have previously been attributed to shaken baby syndrome.’ " And Havard's petition later explained that if the Court granted a new trial, the jury would hear that he actually caused Chloe's death by accidentally dropping her rather than shaking her. He argued that "Dr. Hayne's [trial] testimony [wa]s devoid of any analysis of the accidental dropping of Chloe as described by Havard."

¶8. On May 30, 2014, before our Court rendered a decision, Havard filed an amended application for leave that contained two additional claims. Havard claimed that the State suppressed favorable evidence in violation of Brady v. Maryland¹ and that trial counsel had been ineffective for failing to interview Dr. Hayne before trial. Unlike his original petition, Havard's amended PCR application concerned evidence regarding Havard's underlying felony of sexual battery. To support his claims, Havard cited a newspaper article that quoted Dr. Hayne as saying, "I didn't think there was a sexual assault, ... I didn't see any evidence of sexual assault." Havard also argued that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to interview Dr. Hayne and obtain the above-described information.

¶9. After reviewing Havard's initial and amended application for leave, the Court unanimously granted Havard "leave of this Court to file his petition for post-conviction relief in the trial court on the issues of newly discovered evidence presented in his application for leave ." Order, Havard v. State , No. 2013-DR-01995-SCT (Miss. Apr. 2, 2015) (emphasis added). Finding no merit in Havard's assertions contained within his amended PCR application, the Court's order expressly denied Havard "leave to proceed in the trial court on those two claims." Id. Havard filed his petition for post-conviction relief in the Circuit Court of Adams County. In addition to his newly discovered evidence issues, Havard's modified petition contained the same newspaper article he used as the basis to file his amended PCR application and other allegations related to sexual battery. The trial court set a date for an evidentiary hearing, and both parties designated experts and filed multiple motions. Havard designated Michael Baden, MD, Janice Ophoven, MD, and Chris Van Ee, PhD, as expert witnesses. He also listed Dr. Hayne as a witness. The State only designated one expert, Scott Benton, MD. The State did not contest the qualifications of any of Havard's experts.

¶10. Before the evidentiary hearing, the State filed, among other things, a motion for an order that restricted or limited evidence and testimony to the specific issues contained with the Mississippi Supreme Court's order. The State argued that the Mississippi Supreme Court's order only allowed the trial court to address the issues of newly discovered evidence concerning shaken-baby syndrome and its relation to Chloe's cause and manner of death. Havard argued that the State intertwined the issue of sexual battery with the issue of shaken-baby syndrome so much that the trial judge should allow him to discuss both. Following a review of the order, the trial judge found that he only had jurisdiction to hear the issues of newly discovered evidence concerning shaken-baby syndrome and its relation to Chloe's cause and manner of death. Havard also filed a motion to exclude the opinions of the State's designated expert witness, Dr. Benton. But the trial judge deferred ruling on the challenges to Dr. Benton's qualifications and testimony until the evidentiary hearing. In August of 2017, the circuit court heard testimony from both the State's and Havard's experts.

Evidentiary Hearing Testimony

¶11. The crux of Havard's new-evidence argument is that the triad of injuries used to diagnose shaken-baby syndrome

is no longer valid, and it is now accepted that the recent advances in biomechanics demonstrate that the same injuries can be caused by short, accidental falls.

Dr. Steven Hayne

¶12. Pathologist Dr. Steven Hayne conducted Chloe's autopsy and testified at Havard's trial. Dr. Hayne acknowledged that during Havard's trial he told the jury that Chloe's cause of death was "consistent with Shaken Baby Syndrome." He also read what he told the jury when asked to explain shaken-baby syndrome

. He explained: "It would be consistent with a person violently...