Wednesday, January 25, 2017

Set Aside Guilty Plea

Yesterday, the Mississippi Court of Appeals decided Baker v. State located here.  This case illustrates how hard it is to set aside a guilty plea.  The general holding is that if the Court goes through all the proper steps, without some really good proof and affidavits attached to the petition, the conviction will not be set aside.  In doing some research on another matter, I think the requirements of proof are still present but that the burden may be a little lower in a practical since if the guilty plea was an Alford plea where a person maintains their innocence but agrees it is in their best interest to plea guilty. 

Tuesday, January 17, 2017

Case to Watch

The Mississippi Supreme Court has retained an interesting case located at 2015 CA-1527-SCT.  The Court is set to address two issues based on an order handed down on December 15, 2016 located here dealing with child support.  The parties have been ordered to brief the following:

"(1) Caldwell implies in dictum that children who engage in "clear and
extreme" conduct toward non-custodial parents may forfeit their right to child
support. Does the "clear and extreme" conduct mentioned in Caldwell fall
within one of Mississippi Code Section 43-19-103's criteria for finding that
the presumption in Mississippi Code Section 43-19-101 has been rebutted?

(2) If not, what authority, if any, exists for this Court to establish additional
criteria for overcoming the presumption established by 43 -19-101 ? In briefing
this question, the parties should particularly address, though not exclusively,
this Court's statement in Thurman v. Thurman, 559 So. 2d 1014,1017
(Miss.1990) that "The guidelines for child support awards as now set out in
Miss. Code Ann. §43-19-101 (Supp. 1989) must not control the Chancellor's
award of child support."
Interesting issue to watch. 

Wednesday, January 11, 2017

Bill of Discovery

Yesterday, the Mississippi Court of Appeals decided Graham v. Franks, et. al. located here.  The Court of Appeals determined that the old bill of discovery from prior to the Rules of Civil Procedure was still a valid cause of action.  To me, this opens up a whole new avenue where a party may be able to obtain discovery of items to determine if a cause of action exists prior to filing a separate suit. 

Friday, January 6, 2017

Wrongful Death

On Thursday, the Mississippi Supreme Court decided Estate of Davis et. al. v. Blaylock et. al. located here.  The first case filed in a wrongful death action is the one that proceeds.  The rest are of no effect.   The Court in its opinion noted; 

"Still, Davis contends the proper course was to consolidate her multiple actions. But when faced with a similar request to consolidate in Long, we clearly held that, because any subsequently filed actions are “of no effect and should be dismissed,” they cannot be consolidated with the first action. Id. at 174. “Consolidation of suits presupposes that there are two suits to consolidate.” Id. And because a wrongful-death claim “must be brought in a single suit, there cannot be two suits to consolidate.” Id."