Moore v. State, NO. 2016–KA–01507–SCT

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
Writing for the CourtKITCHENS, PRESIDING JUSTICE, FOR THE COURT
Citation247 So.3d 1198
Parties Everett MOORE a/k/a Everett S. Moore v. STATE of Mississippi
Docket NumberNO. 2016–KA–01507–SCT
Decision Date19 April 2018

247 So.3d 1198

Everett MOORE a/k/a Everett S. Moore
v.
STATE of Mississippi

NO. 2016–KA–01507–SCT

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

April 19, 2018
Rehearing Denied July 26, 2018


ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: OFFICE OF THE STATE PUBLIC DEFENDER BY: W. DANIEL HINCHCLIFF, GEORGE T. HOLMES, JACKSON

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: ABBIE E. KOONCE, JACKSON, JOE HEMLEBEN

EN BANC.

KITCHENS, PRESIDING JUSTICE, FOR THE COURT:

¶ 1. A DeSoto County jury convicted Everett Moore of second-degree murder for shooting and killing Norris Smith. The Circuit Court of DeSoto County, Mississippi, sentenced Moore to thirty years' imprisonment. We reverse Moore's conviction

247 So.3d 1199

and sentence and remand the case for a new trial because the trial court committed reversible error in denying Moore's proposed circumstantial evidence jury instruction.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

¶ 2. On September 29, 2015, at 12:07 p.m., Officer Walter Medford of the Olive Branch Police Department responded to reports of an accident with injuries. Upon arrival at the scene, Officer Medford observed a white Nissan Altima that had collided with a building. Officer Medford testified that he "noticed a black male ... in the driver's seat slumped over the arm rest" who was unresponsive and who "appeared to have a gun shot wound to his head." The window on the driver's side "was broken out." Investigator Roger Hutchins, who is Chief Inspector of the Detective Division of the DeSoto County Sheriff's Department, testified that a badge was found under the driver's seat of the vehicle which identified the victim as Norris Smith. Investigator Hutchins interviewed Smith's wife, who, "right off the bat," said that the shooter was Moore. Over defense counsel's hearsay objection, Investigator Hutchins testified that Smith's wife stated that "there had been an ongoing problem with Mr. Moore accusing Norris Smith, the victim, of having an affair with his wife."

¶ 3. Because the surrounding area where Smith's vehicle was located is heavily industrialized, the DeSoto County Sherriff's Department was able to obtain video surveillance footage from View, Inc.; Anda Pharmaceuticals; McKesson Pharmaceutical Distribution; Syncreon Security Technology; and Williams–Sonoma.1 Detective Steve English of the Criminal Investigations Division of the DeSoto County Sheriff's Department testified that he assisted in gathering and reviewing all surveillance video footage pertinent to the investigation. According to Detective English, the Syncreon surveillance video footage from September 29, 2015, captured Norris Smith, who that same day had begun working at Syncreon Security Technology, coming out of the building where he worked during the lunch hour (some time between 11:38 p.m. and 12:00 p.m.) and getting into a Nissan Altima which belonged to his wife. The Syncreon surveillance video footage then showed Moore's white SUV pulling in behind Smith's vehicle. According to the surveillance video footage and the testimony of Detective English, at approximately 12:00 p.m., Moore exited his SUV and approached the driver's side of Smith's vehicle. Moore leaned on Smith's vehicle and appeared from the surveillance video to be "having some sort of conversation with [Smith]." After their brief conversation concluded, Moore returned to his SUV and "proceeded to drive west through the parking lot."

¶ 4. Detective English also took a number of "screen captures of the images that are shown of the surveillance video." That series of screen captures—still photographs of images from various surveillance videos—was received in evidence as Exhibit 29. According to Detective English's interpretation, the screen captures show that Moore, driving west through the Syncreon parking lot, stopped his vehicle briefly. Smith's vehicle then exited Syncreon's parking lot onto Kirk Road. Detective English opined that, "[o]nce [Moore] sees that Mr. Smith has left out the opposite entrance, he starts proceeding to the west exit of Syncreon's property." After Smith's vehicle had driven past, according to Detective English, Moore then drove

247 So.3d 1200

out of the Syncreon parking lot and onto Kirk Road.

¶ 5. Detective English testified that the screen captures from the Anda Pharmaceutical surveillance show "both vehicles side by side on Kirk Road ...." According to Detective English, the screen captures show Smith's "vehicle ... coming into contact with the curb on the right and Mr. Moore ... slowing down his actions, backing up behind the vehicle to allow Smith's vehicle to keep going forward ... on Kirk Road." The next screen capture, Detective English testified, shows Smith's vehicle "bounce[ ] off of that right curb and [ ] driv[e] down the roadway uncontrollably as Mr. Moore is following behind."

¶ 6. Detective English described the Anda Pharmaceutical surveillance video, which he said showed "Mr. Smith's vehicle slowly come into the intersection almost striking [an] orange 18–wheeler [which] had a green light at the time. Mr. Smith's vehicle went through the intersection, over the curb and down the embankment where it came to a final rest at Prime Automotive."

¶ 7. Various witnesses testified about what they had observed. Ronnie Schuldt said that, as he was driving south on Polk Lane and approaching the intersection with Kirk Road, he was prevented from continuing through the intersection, despite having a green light: "I slowed down and stopped or almost stopped, and the car continued through the intersection heading west and drove up over the curb and then started down; and there was an embankment that goes down to the [Prime Automotive] building." Schuldt, who got out of his own vehicle and walked down the embankment to the driver's side of the car, stated that he saw an unresponsive person slumped over the console with an apparent head wound and that the driver's side window had been shattered. A Prime Automotive employee, Esau Fant, testified that he heard two gunshots and watched a white Altima drive through the intersection and coast down to the Prime Automotive plant. He saw the broken glass and saw that the driver had been shot.

¶ 8. Jonathan Young, an employee of View, Inc., testified that he had turned left onto Polk Road off Kirk Road and "was almost rear ended by a white SUV." Young continued that the SUV, which had a Benton County tag, passed his vehicle in a turn lane and then ran a red light. Young testified that Moore, the defendant, was the person he observed driving the SUV.

¶ 9. Nine to ten hours after the shooting, Moore turned himself in to the police. After reading Moore's Miranda2 rights to him and obtaining a written waiver, Investigator Hutchins interviewed Moore. The audio recorded interview was played for the jury. In the interview, Moore admitted having been in the Syncreon parking lot. Moore referenced a text message between his wife and Smith.

¶ 10. Dr. Brent Davis, a deputy chief medical examiner with the office of the Mississippi State Medical Examiner, who was tendered by the State and accepted by the trial court as an expert in forensic pathology, testified that his colleague, Dr. Lisa Funte, actually performed the autopsy but she was unavailable to testify. Dr. Davis testified that he had reviewed and concurred with Dr. Funte's conclusions following Smith's autopsy. He stated that, "[i]n our office, currently all homicides are reviewed and signed off on by each pathologist in the office." Dr. Davis testified that the cause of Smith's death was "[m]ultiple gunshot wounds" and that the manner of Smith's death was "homicide." Moore did

247 So.3d 1201

not object to any of Dr. Davis's testimony or evidence except for photographs the State offered through him that Moore argued were gruesome and would inflame the jury. The court admitted them, overruling Moore's objection.

¶ 11. A DeSoto County grand jury had indicted Moore for murder but the jury found Moore guilty of second-degree murder. Moore sought a judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) or, in the alternative, a new trial, which the trial court denied. Moore was sentenced to a term of forty years, thirty years to be served in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections and the remaining ten years to be served on post-release supervision. Moore timely filed a notice of appeal.

¶ 12. Moore argues on appeal that: (1) the trial court erred by giving a second-degree murder instruction that was not supported by the evidence; (2) the trial court erred in refusing the circumstantial evidence jury instruction Moore had sought; (3) the trial court committed plain error by allowing a forensic pathologist to testify about an expert opinion which was not his own; and (4) the trial court erred by admitting hearsay evidence. We address only the dispositive question of whether the trial court erred in refusing Moore's tendered circumstantial evidence instruction.

ANALYSIS

¶ 13. The State produced no confession or eyewitness to the shooting. Moore proposed a circumstantial evidence jury instruction, but the trial court declined to give it. Moore argues on appeal that he was entitled to a circumstantial evidence...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 practice notes
  • Nevels v. State, 2020-KA-00335-SCT
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • August 19, 2021
    ...court should not be departed from[] unless the rule therein announced is not only manifestly wrong, but mischievous." Moore v. State, 247 So.3d 1198, 1203 (Miss. 2018) (alterations in original) (quoting McDaniel v. Cochran, 158 So.3d 992, 1000 (Miss. 2014)). And on this issue, the Court's c......
  • Nevels v. State, 2020-KA-00335-SCT
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • August 19, 2021
    ...court should not be departed from[ ] unless the rule therein announced is not only manifestly wrong, but mischievous." Moore v. State , 247 So. 3d 1198, 1203 (Miss. 2018) (alterations in original) (quoting McDaniel v. Cochran , 158 So. 3d 992, 1000 (Miss. 2014) ). And on this issue, the Cou......
  • Terry v. State, NO. 2019-CT-00623-SCT
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • January 21, 2021
    ...Mack v. State, 481 So. 2d 793, 794 (Miss. 1985) (citing Keys v. State, 478 So. 2d 266 (Miss. 1985)); see also Moore v. State, 247 So. 3d 1198, 1203 (Miss. 2018) ("[w]here the State 'is without a confession and wholly without eyewitness testimony to the gravamen of the offense charged,' the ......
  • Terry v. State, 2019-CT-00623-SCT
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • January 21, 2021
    ...Mack v. State , 481 So. 2d 793, 794 (Miss. 1985) (citing Keys v. State , 478 So. 2d 266 (Miss. 1985) ); see also Moore v. State , 247 So. 3d 1198, 1203 (Miss. 2018) ("[w]here the State ‘is without a confession and wholly without eyewitness testimony to the gravamen of the offense charged,’ ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
12 cases
  • Nevels v. State, 2020-KA-00335-SCT
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • August 19, 2021
    ...court should not be departed from[] unless the rule therein announced is not only manifestly wrong, but mischievous." Moore v. State, 247 So.3d 1198, 1203 (Miss. 2018) (alterations in original) (quoting McDaniel v. Cochran, 158 So.3d 992, 1000 (Miss. 2014)). And on this issue, the Court's c......
  • Nevels v. State, 2020-KA-00335-SCT
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • August 19, 2021
    ...court should not be departed from[ ] unless the rule therein announced is not only manifestly wrong, but mischievous." Moore v. State , 247 So. 3d 1198, 1203 (Miss. 2018) (alterations in original) (quoting McDaniel v. Cochran , 158 So. 3d 992, 1000 (Miss. 2014) ). And on this issue, the Cou......
  • Terry v. State, NO. 2019-CT-00623-SCT
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • January 21, 2021
    ...Mack v. State, 481 So. 2d 793, 794 (Miss. 1985) (citing Keys v. State, 478 So. 2d 266 (Miss. 1985)); see also Moore v. State, 247 So. 3d 1198, 1203 (Miss. 2018) ("[w]here the State 'is without a confession and wholly without eyewitness testimony to the gravamen of the offense charged,' the ......
  • Terry v. State, 2019-CT-00623-SCT
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • January 21, 2021
    ...Mack v. State , 481 So. 2d 793, 794 (Miss. 1985) (citing Keys v. State , 478 So. 2d 266 (Miss. 1985) ); see also Moore v. State , 247 So. 3d 1198, 1203 (Miss. 2018) ("[w]here the State ‘is without a confession and wholly without eyewitness testimony to the gravamen of the offense charged,’ ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT