White motion in Mississippi

1998Such a contention fails because "the motion for a new trial is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court." Burge v. State, 472 So.2d 392, 397 (Miss.1985).

1997Such a contention fails because "the motion for a new trial is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court." Burge v. State, 472 So. 2d 392, 397 (Miss. 1985).

2023Id. at 902 (¶22).

2021Id. at 483-84 (¶8).

2020“A motion for reconsideration is treated as a motion to amend the judgment pursuant to Rule 59(e) of the Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure[.]” Harris v. Harris, 167 So. 3d 1254, 1257 (¶11) (Miss.

2020Upon our review, we find that White’s motion for reconsideration failed to show any “intervening change in controlling law”; “the availability of new evidence not previously available”; a “need to correct a clear error of law”; or a need “to prevent manifest injustice.” See id.

2017Based on its findings regarding the inability to hear or authenticate the audio recording, the circuit court denied White’s motion to admit the recording. ' ¶ 106.'As a predicate to admission, the proponent of a recording must prove the recording is “relevant as defined by [Mississippi Rule of Evidence] 401, as well as authentic as required by [Mississippi Rule of Evidence] 901.” Ratliff, 752 So.2d at 420 (¶ 13) (citing Ragin v. State, 724 So.2d 901, 903 (¶ 3) (Miss. 1998)).

2017“The recording passes the relevancy test of Rule 401 if it has a ‘tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.’” Id. (quoting M.R.E. 401).

2017As a predicate to admission, the proponent of a recording must prove the recording is “relevant as defined by [Mississippi Rule of Evidence] 401, as well as authentic as required by [Mississippi Rule of Evidence] 901.” Ratliff, 752 So. 2d at 420 (¶13) (citing Ragin v. State, 724 So. 2d 901, 903 (¶3) (Miss. 1998)).

2017Based on its findings regarding the inability to hear or authenticate the audio recording, the circuit court denied White’s motion to admit the recording. ' ¶ 106.'As a predicate to admission, the proponent of a recording must prove the recording is “relevant as defined by [Mississippi Rule of Evidence] 401, as well as authentic as required by [Mississippi Rule of Evidence] 901.” Ratliff, 752 So.2d at 420 (¶ 13) (citing Ragin v. State, 724 So.2d 901, 903 (¶ 3) (Miss. 1998)).

2016Admittedly, the trial court did state in its order for partial summary judgment, which dismissed White’s negligence-based legal-malpractice claim, that the cause of action for “gross negligence, reckless disregard; and intentional'conduct ... should be decided by a jury.” Regardless, it is well established that “gross negligence” and “reckless disregard” are simply higher degrees of negligence.- See City of Laurel v. Williams, 21 So.3d 1170, 1174 (¶ 17) (Miss.2009) (noting that reckless disregard is a higher standard than gross negligence); City of Jackson v. Brister, 838 So.2d 274 , 280 *1050

2016This Court has stated that “a petitioner’s status as a habitual offender can be established at the entry of a guilty plea[.]” Ross v. State, 119 So.3d 1119, 1124 (1117) (Miss.

2016See Conwill v. State, 168 So.3d 1080, 1084 (¶ 19) (Miss.Ct.App.2013).

2015White is correct that the circuit court is responsible for assuring that the jury is “fully and properly instructed on all issues of law relevant to the case.” Harrell v. State, 134 So. 3d 266, 270 (¶14) (Miss. 2014) (quotation omitted).

2015White is correct that the circuit court is responsible for assuring that the jury is “fully and properly instructed on all issues of law relevant to the case.” Harrell v. State, 134 So.3d 266, 270 (¶ 14) (Miss.2014) (quotation omitted).

2014Mabus, 890 So.2d at 821-23 (¶¶ 65-71) (citing White v. White, 557 So.2d 480, 483 (Miss.1989); Ferguson v. Ferguson, 639 So.2d 921 (Miss.1994)).

2014Mabus, 890 So.2d at 821-23 (¶¶ 65-71) (citing White v. White, 557 So.2d 480, 483 (Miss.1989); Ferguson v. Ferguson, 639 So.2d 921 (Miss.1994)).

2014Mabus, 890 So.2d at 821-23 (¶¶ 65-71) (citing White v. White, 557 So.2d 480, 483 (Miss.1989); Ferguson v. Ferguson, 639 So.2d 921 (Miss.1994)).

2014Mabus, 890 So.2d at 821-23 (¶¶ 65-71) (citing White v. White, 557 So.2d 480, 483 (Miss.1989); Ferguson v. Ferguson, 639 So.2d 921 (Miss.1994)).

2010Id. at 967 (¶ 31). ¶ 20.

2009However, the prison-mailbox rule states that “a pro se prisoner’s motion for post-conviction relief is delivered for filing under the [Mississippi Uniform Post-Conviction Collateral Relief Act] and the Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure when the prisoner delivers the papers to prison authorities for mailing.” Sykes v. State, 757 So.2d 997, 1000-01 (¶ 14) (Miss.2000).

2009The circuit judge did not sentence White a second time for the same crime; instead, the circuit judge exercised her “ ‘inherent authority’ to alter a sentence until [the] regular term of court expires.” Leverette v. State, 812 So.2d 241, 244 (¶ 11) (Miss.Ct.App.2002) (citing Miss.

2009Bates, 914 So.2d at 299 (¶ 6). ¶ 14.

2007White points us to Hester v. State, 602 So.2d 869, 872 (Miss.1992) (citations omitted), wherein this Court held: In a homicide case, as in other criminal cases, the court should instruct the jury as to theories and grounds of defense, justification, or excuse supported by the evidence, and a failure to do so is error requiring reversal of a judgment of conviction.

2002Simpson v. State, 678 So.2d 712, 716 (Miss. 1996); Mowdy v. State, 638 So.2d 738, 743 (Miss.1994).

2002Simpson v. State, 678 So.2d 712, 716 (Miss. 1996); Mowdy v. State, 638 So.2d 738, 743 (Miss.1994).

1999McClain v. State, 625 So.2d 774, 778 (Miss.1993). ¶ 13.

1998Next, the trial court opined: "[P]ursuant to MRE 609 and the factors set forth in Peterson v. State, 518 So. 2d 632, 636 (Miss. 1987), that the drug conviction of Roy Shedd was inadmissible for impeachment purposes.