Lafayette v. State, 2010-KA-00064-COA

• Decision Date: 19 July 2011
• Docket Number: NO. 2010-KA-00064-COA,2010-KA-00064-COA
• Parties: ANTHONY LAFAYETTE APPELLANT v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE
• Court: Mississippi Court of Appeals

ANTHONY LAFAYETTE APPELLANT v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE

NO. 2010-KA-00064-COA

COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

Dated: July 19, 2011

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 12/17/2009

TRIAL JUDGE: HON. KENNETH L. THOMAS

COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: BOLIVAR COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: STAN PERKINS

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

BY: LAURA HOGAN TEDDER

DISTRICT ATTORNEY: BRENDA FAY MITCHELL

NATURE OF THE CASE: CRIMINAL - FELONY

TRIAL COURT DISPOSITION: CONVICTED OF MANSLAUGHTER AND

SENTENCED TO EIGHTEEN YEARS IN

THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED - 07/19/2011

MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED:

MANDATE ISSUED:

BEFORE LEE, C.J., BARNES AND MAXWELL, JJ.

BARNES, J., FOR THE COURT:

¶1. In the early morning hours of October 20, 2007, Earnest Booth died from a gunshot wound that he suffered during an altercation at a local dance club in Benoit, Mississippi. Anthony Lafayette was charged with Booth's murder and was convicted of manslaughter by a Bolivar County Circuit Court jury. The circuit court sentenced Lafayette to eighteen years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections (MDOC). After the circuit courtdenied Lafayette's motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV), or in the alternative, for a new trial, he appealed his conviction. Finding no reversible error, we affirm the circuit court's judgment.

SUMMARY OF FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

¶2. Shortly after 1:00 a.m. on October 20, 2007, Lafayette was at Club Checkers in Benoit, Mississippi, mingling with some friends. Lafayette was standing on the crowded dance floor of the club when he and another man bumped into one another. Some heated words were exchanged, and Booth, who apparently was acquainted with the other man, became involved in the altercation. According to Lafayette and his brother who was with him, Booth pulled his shirt up, revealing a handgun in his waistband.¹ Feeling threatened, Lafayette produced a .9-millimeter Highpoint semi-automatic handgun and shot into the air twice. Patrons of the club immediately scattered and headed toward the exit. Timothy Mayes, the club's security guard, was working at the front door when he heard the two shots from the back of the club. Since the club was extremely busy, it took Mayes a minute or so to maneuver through the crowd and reach the dance floor located at the back of the club. Mayes observed Lafayette and Booth standing on the dance floor and Lafayette holding a .9-millimeter handgun. Mayes, along with the club bartender, Ronald Christian, talked to Lafayette and tried to get him to leave the club peacefully. When Mayes and Christian turned back toward the front door to escort Lafayette outside, both men heard a single shot. Upon turning, they saw Booth lying on the floor, with a gunshot wound to the face.Lafayette quickly exited the club, leaving his gun. Mayes retrieved Lafayette's .9-millimeter Highpoint handgun and a .40-caliber pistol that apparently fell from Booth's pocket or waistband.

¶3. After receiving a call regarding the shooting, Officer Charles Gilmer of the Bolivar County Sheriff's Department arrived at the club and found that two Benoit police officers had already secured the scene. Officer Gilmer saw Booth lying on the dance floor, dead from a gunshot to the face. Officer Gilmer noted that the club was in disarray with tables turned over and several unspent rounds of ammunition and a shell casing lying on the floor. All of the ammunition retrieved from the crime scene was for a .9-millimeter handgun. Both guns that Mayes retrieved were turned over to the police. Later evidence showed that Lafayette had bought his .9-millimeter Highpoint handgun from a local pawn shop, along with two rounds of ammunition. Additionally, a .9-millimeter Ruger handgun was also found by Officer Gilmer on a sitting rail outside the club.

¶4. Although Lafayette had gone home immediately after the shooting, he contacted the police later that morning and stated that he wanted to surrender to authorities. After being read his rights and submitting a statement, Lafayette was arrested. On March 3, 2008, Lafayette was indicted for depraved-heart murder by a Bolivar County grand jury. After a jury trial, Lafayette was convicted of the lesser offense of manslaughter on October 28, 2009. At a hearing on December 17, 2009, Lafayette was sentenced to eighteen years in the custody of the MDOC. Lafayette filed a motion for a JNOV or, in the alternative, for a new trial. The circuit court denied the motion, and Lafayette timely filed his notice of appeal. Finding that Lafayette's assignments of error are without merit, we affirm the judgment of the circuitcourt.

DISCUSSION

I. Whether the circuit court erred by refusing Lafayette's peremptory jury instruction in part or in whole.

¶5. At the close of the trial, defense counsel renewed its motion for a directed verdict and filed a peremptory instruction, both of which the circuit court denied. Lafayette now argues that the circuit court should have granted his peremptory instruction as the State failed to prove the necessary elements of murder. In the alternative, Lafayette claims that the judge should have reduced the charge against Lafayette to manslaughter as the evidence did not support a verdict of murder.

¶6. "The standard of review of the denial of a request for a peremptory jury instruction is the same as that for the denial of a motion for a directed verdict." McMillan v. State, 6 So. 3d 444, 447 (¶12) (Miss. Ct. App. 2009) (citing Baker v. State, 802 So. 2d 77, 81 (¶13) (Miss. 2001)). If the evidence is sufficient to support the denial of the peremptory instruction when viewing all the evidence in a light more favorable to the State, the circuit court's decision will be affirmed. Id. "Reversal can only occur when the facts point in favor of the defendant such that reasonable men could not have found, beyond a reasonable doubt, the defendant was guilty." Sneed v. State, 31 So. 3d 33, 40 (¶20) (Miss. Ct. App. 2009) (citing Bush v. State, 895 So. 2d 836, 843 (¶16) (Miss. 2005)).

¶7. We find that there was sufficient evidence to support the verdict and the denial of Lafayette's peremptory instruction. Both Mayes and Christian testified that they saw Lafayette standing near Booth prior to the shooting and that Lafayette was holding a gun.The evidence showed that Lafayette had been engaged in a heated exchange with Booth prior to the shooting and that Lafayette's gun matched the type of ammunition found at the crime scene and the type of ammunition that killed Booth. Further, Dr. Stephen Hayne, who performed the autopsy on Booth, noted that his examination revealed that Booth had been shot at close range. Lastly, Lafayette quickly left the scene after the shooting.

¶8. In the alternative, Lafayette also claims that the circuit court should have reduced the charge against him from murder to manslaughter. He cites the court's sua sponte decision to include an instruction for the lesser charge as evidence that the judge "believe[d] the alleged crime was manslaughter." The supreme court has stated: "Whether a homicide is classified as a murder or manslaughter is ordinarily an inquiry to be made by the jury." Moore v. State, 52 So. 3d 339, 347 (¶32) (Miss. 2010) (quoting Hodge v. State, 823 So. 2d 1162, 1166 (¶16) (Miss. 2002)). The jury was given instructions for both murder and manslaughter and determined that Lafayette was guilty of manslaughter, not murder.

¶9. Based on the evidence, we find that a rational trier of fact could find the elements of manslaughter existed beyond a reasonable doubt. As the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict, we find no error in the circuit court's denial of Lafayette's peremptory instruction. This issue is without merit.

II. Whether the circuit court erred in denying jury instructions D-4 and D-7.

¶10. Lafayette contends that it was error for the circuit court to deny jury instructions D-4 and D-7. "In reviewing the grant or denial of jury instructions, this Court considers the instructions as a whole and within context." Ruffin v. State, 992 So. 2d 1165, 1176 (¶33)(Miss. 2008) (citing Strickland v. State, 980 So. 2d 908, 922 (¶24) (Miss. 2008)). A court may deny a jury instruction if it "incorrectly states the law, is covered fairly elsewhere in the instructions, or is without foundation in the evidence." Id.

¶11. Jury instruction D-4 states:

The Court instructs the jury that under the law, the term reasonable doubt as used by the Court in these instructions to the jury as the law in the trial of criminal cases, is a sacred and substantial right of this defendant, ANTHONY LAFAYETTE, who is charged with the crime of murder. The requirement of law that the [S]tate must prove the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is a right given and guaranteed unto him by the laws of the State of Mississippi and the United States of America and you as jurors are bound by that law. You are accordingly instructed that if a reasonable doubt of the guilt of the defendant arises in your mind from the evidence, or from the lack of evidence, or from an insufficiency of the evidence, or from a conflict in the evidence, or from the credibility of a material witness, then under the law, it is the sworn duty of each such member of the jury, who has such a reasonable doubt in their mind as to the guilt of the defendant, to return a verdict of Not Guilty.

The circuit judge's denial of this jury instruction was based on his finding that the instruction attempted to define the term "reasonable doubt." Mississippi courts have a "long-standing rule" that any attempt to define "reasonable doubt" for a jury is improper since "reasonable doubt defines itself." Colburn v. State, 990 So. 2d 206, 217 (¶35) (Miss. Ct. App. 2008) (citing Martin v. State, 854 So. 2d 1004, 1009 (¶12) (Miss. 2003)). Moreover, in Staten v. State, 989 So. 2d 938, 950 (¶35) (Miss. Ct. App. 2008), we...