Nolan v. State
| Docket Number: | 2008-CT-00564-SCT Linked Case(s): 2008-KA-00564-COA ; 2008-KA-00564-COA ; 2008-CT-00564-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 05-12-2011 Opinion Author: Waller, C.J. Holding: Affirmed. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Heat-of-passion manslaughter - Sufficiency of evidence - M’Naghten test Judge(s) Concurring: Lamar and Pierce, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): King, J. Dissenting Author : Carlson, P.J. Dissent Joined By : Dickinson, P.J., and Kitchens, J. Concur in Part, Concur in Result 1: Randolph, J. With Separate Written Opinion Concur in Part, Concur in Result Joined By 1: Chandler, J. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CRIMINAL - FELONY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 03-05-2008 Appealed from: DeSoto County Circuit Court Judge: Robert P. Chamberlin Disposition: The circuit judge determined that Nolan was sane at the time of the shooting and found him guilty of heat-of-passion manslaughter. Nolan was sentenced to seven years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections and thirteen years of post-relief supervision, with five years reporting and eight years nonreporting. District Attorney: John W. Champion Case Number: CR2006-0894CD |
|
| Note: | The decision by the Court of Appeals on May 25, 2010, 2008-KA-00564-COA, can be found at http://www.mssc.state.ms.us/Images/Opinions/CO58823.pdf. | |
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Clinton Wyatt Nolan |
JAMES D. FRANKS, JR. |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: JOHN R. HENRY, JR. |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Heat-of-passion manslaughter - Sufficiency of evidence - M’Naghten test |
| Summary of the Facts: | Clinton Nolan was convicted of heat-of-passion manslaughter and sentenced to seven years and thirteen years of post-release supervision. On appeal, the Court of Appeals held that there was sufficient evidence to support that Nolan was sane at the time of the homicide, but it found that there was insufficient evidence to show that Nolan had acted in the heat of passion. The Court of Appeals, nevertheless, affirmed Nolan’s conviction under our general manslaughter statute and remanded the case for resentencing under that statute. The Supreme Court granted certiorari. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | There was sufficient evidence to show that Nolan acted in the heat of passion. Heat of passion is a state of violent and uncontrollable rage engendered by a blow or certain other provocation given, which will reduce homicide from the grade of murder to that of manslaughter. Passion or anger suddenly aroused at the time by some immediate and reasonable provocation, by words or acts of one at the time. The term includes an emotional state of mind characterized by anger, rage, hatred, furious resentment or terror. The Court of Appeals concluded that, even though Nolan had told the 911 dispatcher that he had “acted out of emotion,” there was nothing in the record to show that Nolan’s father had provoked Nolan with words or acts at the time of the shooting. The record, however, indicates that Nolan was angry with his father for calling him a sexual deviant or something of the like. Considering this evidence, it appears that a reasonable fact-finder could have found that Nolan’s father had made certain statements that had provoked Nolan’s actions. The question then, of course, is whether the provocation could have been found immediate and reasonable. Issues surrounding immediacy, i.e., whether a sufficient “cooling off” period has passed between the provocation and the killing so as to negate that the crime occurred in the heat of passion, are questions of fact. The evidence in this case showed that Nolan had become obsessed with the notion that he had been accused of being a sexual deviant. According to Dr. Angelillo, Nolan was “particularly vulnerable” to such accusations, because Nolan had been sexually molested earlier in life. There was testimony that Nolan had not slept in the days leading up to the shooting. The day before the shooting, Nolan was described as being “withdrawn inside himself” and “disturbed.” Furthermore, he said that he “acted out of emotion,” and that he “couldn’t control this [the shooting].” Thus, there was sufficient evidence that, in the days preceding the shooting, Nolan was in a constant state of agitation, predicated upon his father’s comments regarding his sexuality. Nolan, moreover, was said to be especially sensitive to such statements because of earlier life experiences. Accordingly, a reasonable fact-finder could have found that Nolan had acted in the heat of passion. To be deemed insane under the M’Naghten test, the defendant must be laboring under such defect of reason from disease of the mind as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing or if he did know it, that he did not know that what he was doing was wrong. A defendant is presumed to be sane until some reasonable doubt of sanity arises. Once reasonable doubt of sanity is created, the State must prove the defendant’s sanity beyond a reasonable doubt. The circuit judge found that the State had proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Nolan was sane at the time of the shooting. Nothing, he said, contradicted that Nolan “knew the nature and the quality of his physical acts and the physical consequences of [his] acts.” He concluded further that Nolan knew that what he was doing was wrong. Sufficient evidence existed in this case to determine that Nolan was sane at the time of the shooting. Though Dr. Lott conceded that Nolan’s behavior was related to his mental illness, he opined that Nolan recognized the wrongfulness of his actions based upon Nolan’s coherent conversation with the 911 dispatcher. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
