I N T H E SUPR EM E C O UR T O F M I SS I SS I PPI NO. 2 0 0 8 - CT - 0 1 3 4 9 - S CT THURM AN KI RKWOOD A/

K/ A M ICKEY
v. STATE OFM

I SS I SS I PPI ON W RI T OF CE RT I ORARI D A T E O F JU D G M E N T : 01/ 29/ 2008 TRI AL J UD GE: HO N. CH AR LES E
. W EBSTER COURT F ROM W HI CH APP EAL ED: COAHO M A COUN TY CI RCUI T COURT AT T OR NE YS F OR AP P E L L ANT : AL L AN D. S HAC KE L F OR D OFFI CE O F I ND I GEN T APPEALS BY : J US T I N T AYL OR CO OK LESL I E S. LEE AT T OR NE Y F OR AP P E L L E E : OF F I CE OF T HE AT T OR NE Y GE NE RA L BY : W
. G LEN N W A TTS DI STRI CT A TTOR NEY : LAU REN CE Y
. M ELLEN NAT UR E OF T HE CA S E : CR I M I NAL - F E L ONY DI S P OS I T I ON: AF F I RMED I N P AR T ; RE VE RS E D AND R E M A N D E D I N PA R T - 01/ 20/ 2011 M OT I ON F OR RE HE AR I NG F I L E D: M ANDAT E I S S UE D:
EN BA NC. KI TCHEN S , J UST I CE, FOR TH E COU RT: ¶1
. T h u rm an K irk w o o d w as fo u n d g u il ty b y a C o a h o m a C o u n ty ju ry o f bu rglary o f a dw el l i ng, gr and l ar ceny, f el ony f l eei ng, and pos s es s i on of a f i r earm by a convi ct ed f el on. T he tr i al j udge adj udi cat ed K i r kw ood an habi tual of f enderas def

i ned by M i s s i s s i ppi C ode Sect i on 99- 19- 81 ( R ev. 2007) and s ent enced hi m t o the maxi m um i m pr i s onm enton eac h char ge. T he bur gl ary, f el ony f l eei ng, and pos s es s i on sent ences w er e or der ed t o run

### The Cour t of Appeals mi st ake nly s ai d that allfour sente nce s we reorde re d to r un 1 

### con currently. Kirkwo od

v. Sta te , 2010 WL 432254, ¶ 1 ( Mis s. Ct. App. Feb. 9, 2010).

2 c o n se c u tiv e ly to e a c h o th e r, an d th e g ra n d la rc e n y se n ten c e w a s o rd e re d to ru n c o n c u rre n tly
w ith the o ther thre e se n tenc es. O n ap p ea l, th e C o u rto f A p p ea ls affi rm ed K irk w o o d ’s 1
c o n v ic tio n s a n d s e n te n c e s . 

### Kirkwo od v. Sta te , 2010 WL 432254 ( Mis s. Ct. App. Feb. 9, 2010)
. W e gr ant ed K i r kw ood’ s pet i t i on f orw r i tof

cert i or ar i t o address w hetherthe tr i al
courterr ed by r ef

us i ng a ci r cumst ant i al evi dence i ns truct i on on the hous e bur gl ary and gr and lar c e n y c h a rg e s. B e c a u se a ll th e e v id e n c e o f g u ilto f th e se tw o c rim e s w a s c irc u m sta n tial, K i rkw ood w as ent i t l ed t o a ci r cumst ant i al evi dence i ns truct i on; ther ef or e, w e r ever s e the convi ct i ons of

bur gl ary of

a dw el l i ng and gra nd l ar ceny a nd r emand t he ca s e f orf ur ther p ro c e e d in g s in th e trial c o u rt. F a cts ¶ 2
. O n O c to b e r 1 1 , 2 0 0 7 , R o y B a n k s o f C lar k sd a le, M iss iss ip p i, a w o k e to fin d th a t h is 1991 bl ue and gr ey G M C Saf ar i van w as m i s s i ng. B anks ’ s w i f e cal l ed the C l arks dal e Pol i ce D epartm entt o r eportthatthe van ha d been s t ol en. ¶ 3
. T h a t m o rn in g , T h u rm a n K irk w o o d a p p e a re d a t W .C
. S m ith ’s tra iler in F ria r’s P o in t, M issi ssipp i. A t tri al, S m ith test if ied th at K irk w o o d w as d ri v ing a v an , an d iden ti fi ed B an k s’s
van as the one K i r kw ood had bee n dr i vi ng. A ccor di ng t o Sm i th, K i r kw ood w as l ooki ng f or
w ork. Sm i th t ol d K i r kw ood t hathe w as goi ng t o M emphi s , butw oul d be bac k l at erthatday, and gave K i r kw ood t en dol l ar s . Sm i th t es t i f i ed thatw hi l e he w as i n M emphi s , he r ece i ved
a te le p h o n e c a ll f

ro m K ir k w o o d in q u ir in g a b o u t S m ith ’s w h e re a b o u ts .

### 3

¶4. W hen Sm i th r eturned t o hi s tr ai l erthateveni ng , h e foun d t hat an out erdoor w as b ro k e n , a n d th a t fo u r rifle s, a b rie fc a se , an d tw o ra d io sc a n n e rs w e re m iss in g . S m ith i m m edi at el y r eport ed the bur gl ary of hi s hom e t o l ocal pol i ce. ¶5
. M eanw hi l e, O f

f i cerSt even Poerof

the Cl ar ks dal e Pol i ce D epart m ent s pot t ed K i rkw ood dri vi ng the s t ol en van. Poert es t i f i ed thathe coul d s ee the dr i ver ’ s f ace as they pas s ed ea ch otheron the r oad. A f t erver i f yi ng thatthe van w as the s ame v ehicl e thathad been r eport ed m i s s i ng by B anks ’ s w i f e, P oerat t empt ed t o st op t he van by t urni ng on hi s bl ue l i ght s and s i r en. W hen the dr i verf ai l ed t o s t op, a hi gh- s peed c has e bega n. E ventual l y, the
van ca m e t o a s t op, and Poert es t i f i ed thathe s aw K i r kw ood exi tthe s t ol en vehi cl e and run. I ns i de the van w er e the f ourr i f l es , the br i ef

cas e, and one of

t he r adi o sca nner s thatSm i th had
r eport ed mi s s i ng fr om hi s t r ai l er . Shor t l y ther eaf t er , K i r kw ood w as appr ehende d i n a nea rby f i el d. ¶6. Poer t es t i f

i ed that one other per s on w as i n the vehi cl e. T he pas s enger w as a deaf and
m ut e w om an, w ho w as unabl e t o com m uni cat e w i th l aw enf or cementof

f i ci al s . She w as t aken t o the pol i ce s t at i on and eve ntual l y w as rel eas ed. A tthe t i m e of tr i al , s he coul d not be f ound. ¶ 7
. K irk w o o d tes tified in h is o w n d e fe n s e , c la im in g th a t h e h a d n o th in g to d o w ith
s t eal i ng the van orbur gl ar i zi ng Sm i th’ s tr ai l er . A ccor di ng t o hi s ver s i on of event s , he had dr i ven the van t o Sm i th’ s tr ai l ert o pur chas e cr ack c ocai ne. H e w as accompani ed by thr ee
o th e r in d iv id u a ls: E a rn e st W o o d s, L a rry M ix o n , an d a w o m a n n a m e d B lair. A c c o rd in g to K i rkw ood, hi s compani ons ha d be en i n pos s es s i on of the s t ol en van f

orabouta w eek. A f

t er

### Contrar y to t he Cour t of Appeals ’s opinion, Kirkwood did not te stif y that “ [h] e s aw 2 

### his f ri ends exi t t

he trail er ‘wi th a blanket with som ething in it .’ ” Kir kwood, 2 01 0 W L 432254 at ¶ 7. The Court

of Appe al s mi st ake nly said that Kirkwood t es ti fi ed that the rewere thre e 3 

### oth er peo ple inthe v an. Kir kwood, 2010 WL 432254 at ¶ ¶ 7, 42. 4 he and hi s f

r i ends us ed the drugs , he cl ai m ed, they r eturned t o Sm i th’ s tr ai l ert o buy m or e. W hen Sm i th w as notther e, K i r kw ood cal l ed Sm i th t o f i nd outw hen he w oul d r eturn. K irk w o o d te stifie d th a t W o o d s a n d M ix o n b e c a m e im p a tien t, an d th e y d e c id e d to b re a k in to Sm i th’ s tr ai l erto st eal the drugs . K i r kw ood cont ended thathe had w arned them nott o go i n t o th e tr a i l e r , a n d wh e n th e y p r o c e e d e d a g a i n s th i s a d v i c e , Ki r k wo o d wa l k e d a wa y . He t es t i f i ed thathi s fr i ends pi cked hi m up l at er“dow n t he str eet . ” A ccor di ng t o K i r kw ood, he
s aw a bl anketcover i ng s om e uni dent i f i ed i t ems i n the van, buthe di d notknow w hatw as underthe bl anket
. T he f our s om e then w entt o W oods ’ s hous e t o s m oke m or e cr ack c ocai ne. 2 ¶ 8
. A t so m e p o in t, M ix o n le ft th e g ro u p , a n d K irk w o o d te stifie d th a t h e , W o o d s, a n d B lair
w e re rid in g aro u n d in th e v a n w h e n O ffic e r P o e r atte m p ted to sto p the m . K ir k w o o d s a id 3 that W oo ds w as dri ving t he v an b ut m anag ed to escape, o n foo t , fr om the p oli ce off i cers . A c c o rd in g to K irk w o o d , h e h a d ru n b e c a u se h e w a s p a ra n o id a n d h ig h a n d w a n ted to g e t rid
o f t h e d ru g s a n d th e c ra c k p ip e h e h a d in h is p o s s e s s io n . ¶9. D ur i ng the jury instruct i on con fer ence, K i rkw oo d reque st ed a c i r cumst ant i al evi dence i ns truct i on r egar di ng the char ges of gr and l ar ceny, burgl ary of a dw el l i ng, and pos s es s i on of a firearm b y a c o n v ict ed felon
. T h e tri al j u d g e d en ied th e ins tru cti o n , rea so n ing that th ere
w as di r ectevi dence t o pr ove al l the char ges . K i r kw ood ra i s ed the deni al of a c i r cumst ant i al

### 5

evi dence i ns truct i on, as i trel at ed t o the bur gl ary and gr and l ar ceny c har ges , as a poi ntof
err ori n hi s appeal
. T he C our tof A ppeal s hel d thatthe tr i al j udge di d noterri n denyi ng the i nstruct i on , as there w as di rectproof of the cri m es. D i s cus s i on ¶ 1 0
. “ W h e re a ll th e e v id e n c e ten d in g to p ro v e th e g u ilt o f th e d e fe n d a n t is c irc u m sta n tial, the tr i al courtm us tgr anta j ury i ns truct i on thate very r eas onabl e hypothes i s otherthan that of gui l tm us tbe exc l uded i n or dert o c onvi ct . ” Ma n n in gv. S ta te , 73 5 S o. 2d 32 3, 33 8 (M i ss. 19 99 ) ( quot i ng G ive n s v . S ta te , 618 So. 2d 1313, 1318 ( M i s s . 1993) )
. “C i r cumst ant i al evidence i s evidence w hich, w i tho ut go i ng di rect l y t o prove t he ex i st ence o f a f act , gives r i se t o a l ogi cal i nf

er ence thats uch a f

actdoes exi s t . ” A lex a n de r v . S ta te , 749 So. 2d 1031, 1036 ( M i s s . 1999) ( quot i ng K e y s v . S ta te , 478 So. 2d 266, 268 ( M i s s . 1985) )
. W hil e evi dence does notal w ays f

al l neat l y i nt o one ca t egory, exampl es of di r ectevi dence i ncl ude an admi s s i on orconf

es s i on by the def

endantt o “a si gn i fi cantel ementof the of f ens e, ” or eyew i tnes s t es t i m ony “t o the gr avamen of the of f ens e cha r ged. ” Ma c kv. S ta te , 481 So. 2d 7 9 3 , 7 9 5 (M is s . 1 9 8 5 ) ( c ita tio n s o m itte d ). ¶11. T he C our t of A ppeal s f ound that ther e w as di r ect evi dence of bur gl ary of a dw el l i ng and gr and l a r c e ny ba s e d o n Ki r kwood’ s t e s t i mony, Poe r ’ s t e s t i mony tha the ha d s e en K i rkw ood dr i vi ng the van, and the evi dence thatSm i th’ s s t ol en pr operty w as f ound i ns i de th e v a n . K

irkw ood , 2010 W L 432254 at¶ 42. W e di s agr ee thatany of thi s cons t i tut es di r ect
e v id e n c e o f K irk w o o d ’s g u ilto f th e h o u se b u rg lar y a n d g ra n d lar c e n y c h a rg e s. N o th in g in K i r kw ood’ s t e s t i mony a mount e d t o a n a dmi s s i on of gu i l tt o a n e s s e nt i a l e l e mentof e i the rM i s s i s s i ppi C ode Sect i on 97- 17- 23( 1) ( R ev. 2006) def i nes burgl ary of a dw el l i ng as 4 “b rea k ing an d en teri n g th e d w ell ing ho u se o r i n n er do o r of su ch d w ell ing h o u se o f an o ther, wh e th e ra rme d wi th a d e a d l y we a p o n o rn o t , a n d wh e th e rth e r e s h a l l be a tt h e t i me s o me h u m a n b e in g in s u c h d w e llin g h o u s e o r n o t, w ith in te n t to c o m m it s o m e c ri m e th e re in .” 

### 6 c ri m e , a n d th e S ta te d id n o t p ro d u c e a n y e y e w itn e s s to e ith e r o f t h o s e c ri m e s . Ma c kv. S ta te , 4 8 1 S o . 2 d 7 9 3 , 7 9 5 (M is s . 1 9 8 5 ). ¶12. T he el ement s of

bur gl ary of

a dw el l i ng ar e “( 1) t he unl aw f ul br eaki ng and ent er i ng[ of a dw el l i ng] ; and ( 2) the i nt entt o comm i ts om e cr i m e w hen entry i s att ai ned. ” P arkerv. S ta te , 962 S o. 2 d 25 , 27 ( M i s s . 2007) ( quot i ng E dw a rds v . S ta te, 800 So. 2d 454, 463- 64 (M iss. 2 0 0 1 )). See M i s s . C ode A nn. § 97- 17- 23 (Rev. 2006)
. A ccor di ng t o K i r kw ood, he 4 d id n o t p a rticip a te in th e b u rg lar y in a n y w a y , an d h e tried to c o n v in c e h is frie n d s n o t to b re a k into S m ith ’s tra iler. A lth o u g h m o st o f th e sto len item s fr o m th e tra iler w e re fo u n d in the van thatK i r kw oo d and at l eastone otherper s on occupi ed, ther e s i m pl y i s no di r ect
e v id e n c e th a t h e c o m m itt e d o r to o k p a rt in th e b re a k in g a n d e n ter in g o r th a t h e in ten d e d to steal an y thing after bre ak ing into a n d en teri n g S m ith ’s trail er. ¶13. T he cr i m e of gr and l arceny i s “t aki ng and carryi ng aw ay, f el oni ous l y, the per s onal pr operty of

another , of

the val ue of

Fi ve H undr ed D ol l ar s ($500. 00) or m or e. ” M i s s . C ode A nn. § 97- 17- 41( 1) ( R ev. 2006)
. A s w i th the bur gl ary c har ge, ther e w as no di r ectevi dence thatK i rkw ood s t ol e B anks ’ s van. T hatO f f i cerPoers aw K i r kw ood dr i vi ng the van doe s not
con st i tute di rectev i den ce thatK i rkw oo d fel on i ou sl y took o r “carr[ i ed] aw ay” the van
. M i ss. C ode A nn. § 97- 17- 41( 1). W i thoutany di r ectevi dence of ei thercr i m e, K i r kw ood w as

### 7

e n tit led to a c irc u m sta n tial e v id e n c e in stru c tio n , an d th e trial c o u rt e rre d b y re fu sin g to i ns tructthe j ury pr oper l y. C oncl usi on ¶ 1 4
. W e a ffi rm the ju d g m e n t an d se n ten c e s re n d e re d b y th e C o a h o m a C o u n ty C ir cu it C o u rt i n Count I I , f

el ony f l eei ng, a nd CountI I I , pos s es s i on of a f i r earm by a convict ed fel on. B eca us e w e f

i nd thatther e w as no di r ectevi dence thatK i r kw ood comm i t t ed the cr i m es of b u rg lar y o f a d w e lli n g o r g ra n d lar c e n y , w e re v e rse th e ju d g m e n ts o f th e C o u rt o f A p p e a ls and the ci r cui tcourtas t o C ountI , bur gl ary of a dw el l i ng, and C ountI V , gr and l ar ceny. K i rkw ood’ s c onvi ct i ons on C ount s I and I V ar e her eby r ever s ed, and the ca s e i s r emanded to th e tr ia l c o u rtfo r f

u rt h e r p ro c e e d in g s c o n s is te n t w ith th is o p in io n . ¶ 1 5
. T H E JU D G M E N T O F T H E C O A H O M A C O U N T Y C IR C U IT C O U R T IS A F F IR M E D IN P A R T A N D R E V E R S E D A N D R E M A N D E D IN P A R T . C O U N T I: CONVI CT I ON OF BU RGLARY O F A DW ELLI NG AND S EN TE NCE OF TW EN TY F I VE ( 2 5 ) YE ARS I N T HE CU S T OD Y O F T HE M I S S I S S I P P I DE P AR T M E NT OF CO RR E CT I ON S , RE VE RS E D A ND RE M AN DE D. C OU NT I I : C ON VI CT I ON OF F E L ON Y F L E E I NG AN D S E NT E NC E OF F I VE ( 5 ) YE AR S I N T HE CU S T OD Y O F T H E M ISS ISS IP P I D E P A R T M E N T O F C O R R E C T IO N S , A F F IR M E D . C O U N T III: CONVI CT I ON OF P OS S ES S I ON OF A F I RE ARM BY A C ON VI CT ED F EL ON AND SENTE NCE O F TE N ( 1 0 ) YEARS I N THE C UST OD Y O F THE M I S S I S S I PPI D E P A R T M E N T O F C O R R E C T IO N S , A F F IR M E D . S E N T E N C E S IN C O U N T S II AND I I I S HALL NOT B E RE DUCE D OR S US P EN DE D NOR S HALL AP P EL LA NT B E E L IG IB L E F O R P A R O L E O R P R O B A T IO N D U R IN G T H E T E R M O F S A ID S EN TE NCE S . S ENT EN CE S I N COUNT S I I AND I I I S HALL RUN CONS EC UT I VE LY . COUN T I V: CONVI CT I ON OF GRAND L ARCE NY AND SENTE NC E O F TEN ( 10 ) Y EA RS I N T H E C USTO DY O F TH E M I SS I SS I PPI DE P ART M EN T OF CORRE CT I ONS , RE VE RS ED AND RE M ANDE D. W AL L E R, C. J . , CA RL S ON AN D GRA VE S , P . J J . , DI CK I NS ON , RA ND OL P H, LA M AR, CHANDL ER AND P I ER CE , J J . , CONCUR.