I N T H E C O UR T O F APPEA LS O F TH E STAT E O F M I SS I SS I PPI NO . 2 0 1 3 - KA - 0 1 3 8 4 - CO A QU I NC Y F OX A/ K/A Q UI NC Y MONT RA Y F OX AP P EL LA NT
v. STATE O F M I SS I SS I PPI APP ELLEE
D A T E O F JU D G M E N T : 08/ 08/ 2013 TRI AL J UDG E: HON
. LE S TE R F . W I LL I AM S ON J R. CO UR T F RO M W HI CH AP P E AL E D: LAUDERDALE COUNTY CI RCUI T COURT ATTO RN EY FO R A PP ELLAN T: OFFI CE O F S TATE PUB LI C D EFENDER BY : BEN J AM I N A LLEN SUB ER 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 : LAU RA HO GA N TED DER DI STRI CT A TTOR NEY : BI LBO M I TCH ELL NAT UR E OF T HE CA S E : CR I M I NAL - F E L ONY TRI AL C OU RT D I SP OSI TI ON : CO NV I CTED OF O NE C OU NT O F ARM ED CA RJ AC KI NG, T W O C OUNT S OF KI DNAP P I NG, AND ON E CO UNT OF AR M E D R OB BE RY , AND S E NT E NC E D, AS A H A BI TU A L O FFEN D ER , TO LI FE I M P RI S ONMENT I N T HE CU S T ODY OF T HE M I S S I S S I P P I DE P AR T M E NT OF CO RRECTI ON S, ON EAC H C OU NT, W I TH AL L L I F E S E NT E NC E S T O R UN CONCURRENTL Y TO ONE ANO THE R, BU T CO NS E CU T I VE L Y T O ANY PREVI OU SLY I M POSED SENTEN CES D I SPO SI T I O N : A FFIRM E D - 11/ 04/ 2014 M OT I ON F OR RE HE AR I NG F I L E D: M ANDAT E I S S UE D: B E F O R E L E E , C . J. , R O B E R T S A N D C A R L T O N , JJ. RO BERTS , J . , FOR TH E COU RT: ¶1. Fol l ow i ng hi s tr i al i n the L auder dal e C ounty C i r cui t C our t , a j ury convi ct ed Q ui ncy

### Whil e Fox and Jone s we reco- indi ct ee s, only Fox’ s tri al an d pres ent appe alar e at 1 

### is sue . Fox had previ ou s convi ctions in La uderdal e County Circui t Cour t f or arm ed robber

y 2 

### and s im plero bb ery occurring at di ff er ent time s and involving di ff er ent vic tims . Hehad 2 Fox of tw o count s of

ki dn appi ng, one countof arm ed ca r

j acki ng, and one c ountof arm ed
r obbery. Fox w as s ent ence d, as an habi tual of f ender , t o l i f

e i m pr i s onm enti n t he cus t ody of the M i s s i s s i ppi D epart m entof C orr ect i ons ( M D O C ) f

ore ach count , w i th hi s s ent ence s t o run
c o n c u rre n tly to o n e a n o th e r. F o x in iti a lly filed a m o tio n fo r a n e w trial, w h ich th e c irc u it
courtdeni ed. Fox t hen f i l ed a not i ce of

appea l
. H ow ever , overtw o w eeks aft erf i l i ng a not i ce of appea l , Fox f

i l ed a s econd m ot i on f

ora new tr i al w i th the ci r cui tcourt . I n i t , he
a lleg e d th a t th e re w a s n e w ly d isc o v e re d e v id e n c e th a t Je ss ie J o n e s, a w itn e ss fo r th e S tate and ac compl i ce t o the cr i m es , r ece i ved a mor e l eni ents ent ence than w hathe t es t i f i ed t o at tr i al
. T he ci r cui tcourtdeni ed Fox’ s s econd mot i on f ora new tr i al , and Fox f i l ed the pr es ent appea l
. H e as ks thi s C our tt o det erm i ne w hetherthe ci r cui tcourterr ed i n denyi ng hi s s econd
m ot i on f ora new tr i al and w hetherthe ci r cui tcourterr ed i n al l ow i ng the St at e t o i ntr oduce
e v i d e n c e o f

F o x ’ s o th e rc r i me s . F i n d i n g n o e rr o r , we a f f i r m. F ACT S AND P ROCE DURAL HI S TORY ¶2. O n A ugus t2, 2 01 2, F ox an d his codef endant , J ones , w er e i ndi ct ed j oi nt l y f or the
arm ed carj acking of R ob i n R osenb aum , the kidnap ping o f R osenb aum an d A m and a D avis , a n d the arm ed rob b ery of D av is. F o x an d Jon es w ere also i n d ividu all y i n d ict ed , in c o u n ts f i ve and s i x, f

orf el on i n pos s es s i on of

a f i r ear m . F ox w as al s o i ndi ct ed as a habi tual

1 of f enderpur s uantt o M i s s i s s i ppi C ode A nnot at ed s ect i on 99- 19- 83 (Rev. 2007) , w hi ch made h im e lig ib le f

o r a life s e n ten c e if h e w a s c o n v icte d o f a n y o f th e c h a rg e s in h is in d ictm e n t. 2

### se rve d over fi ve years in cust ody for e ac h. On J anuary 10, 2012, Fox wa s on a sus pende d senten ce andpro batio n fo r these p rior v iolent felon ies. 3 F o x e l e c t e d t o g o t o tr i a l , a n d h i s tr i a l wa s h e l d i n th e c i r c u i tc o u r to n M a y 2 8
- 3 0 , 2 0 1 3
. At the begi nni ng of

the f i r s tday of

hi s tr i al , the St at e m oved f ora nol l e pr os equi on the count of f el on i n pos s es s i on of

a f i r earm , a nd the ci r cui tc our tent er ed an or dergr ant i ng the mot i on. A lso o n th e sa m e d a y , the c irc u it co u rt e n ter e d a n a g re e d o rd e r g ra n tin g F o x ’s m o tio n in l i m i ne t o excl ude any r ef er ence , i n the j ury’ s pr es ence , t o Fox’ s pr i orconvi ct i ons orpendi ng fel on y ch arges. ¶3
. T he St at e cal l ed D avi s t o t es t i f y fi r s t . A ccor di ng t o hert es t i mony, s he and R os enbaum w er e nur s es w ho w er e t eachi ng a cl as s f orthe R us h H os pi t al E ducat i on D e p a rt m e n t o n th e n ig h t o f J a n u a ry 1 0 , 2 0 1 2
. A s th e y w e re le a v in g th e fa c ility a ft e r 1 1 p .m ., they s t ood nearR os enbaum’ s vehi cl e t al ki ng. D avi s t es t i f i ed “[ t ] he nextthi ng thathappene d
w a s s o m e b o d y c a m e b e h in d m e , an d th e re w a s a g u n in
. . . [R o s e n b a u m ’s] fa c e .” D a v is exp l ai ned that there w ere tw o m en, on e t al l er than the other , w eari ng bl ue j eans an d h oo dies , w i th the t al l erone hol di ng the gun. D avi s ne vers aw a ny of the men’ s f

aci al f eatur es bes i des thei reyes , becau se t he hoodi es cover ed thei rf ace s . D avi s and R os enbaum gave the men th e ir p u rse s a n d k e y s, b e c a u se th e y w a n ted to a v o id g e tti n g in th e c a r w ith th e m e n . D a v is and R os enbaum di d notha ve any m oney i n thei rpur s es , s o D avi s t ol d the men she w oul d get
m o n e y fro m th e A T M i f th ey w o u ld l et th em l ea v e. D av is an d R o sen b au m g o t in R os enbaum’ s carw i th the m en af t erthe gun w as a gai n poi nt ed i n thei rf ace s . D avi s s ai d that sh e w a s a fra id th e m e n w o u ld sh o o t th e m if th e y d id n o t g e t in th e v e h icle . T h e m e n , w ith the s hor t erm an dr i vi ng R os enbaum’ s car , dr ove t o a bank w her e D avi s handed the t al l er

### 4

m an, w ho w as s i t t i ng w i th heri n the bac k s eat , herdebi tcar d and herP I N num ber
. T he t al l er
m an then hande d the otherm an the gun, w hi l e he gotoutof the cart o use the A T M . H e w as
u n su c c e ss fu l in w ith d ra w in g m o n e y , so h e w e n t b a c k to g e t D a v is o u t o f th e c a r to o . D a v is
w as abl e t o w i thdr aw $500, w hi ch w as the maxi m um s he coul d w i thdr aw f r om the A T M per d a y . T h e b a n k ’s s u rv e ill a n c e v id e o c a p tu re d im a g e s a s th e w ith d ra w a l o c c u rre d . D a v is fu rt h e r t e s tif

ie d th a t “ [t]h e g u y in th e b a c k s e a t w ith m e w a s th e o n e ru n n in g th e s h o w .” A f t erD avi s w i thdr ew t he m oney, t he t w o m en t ook t he m oney, and t hey st ood out s i de of t he
cart al ki ng t o one anotherw hi l e D avi s and R os enbaum w er e i n the ca r . D avi s s ai d, “I l ooked d o w n . [R o sen b au m ] said so m ethin g to m e, an d w h en I l o o k ed b ac k , the y w ere g o n e.” In addi t i on t o the $500, the m en al s o t ook D avi s ’ s cel l phone and ke ys . D avi s and R os enbaum
w a lk e d to a n e a rb y g a s s tatio n , w h e re th e y w e re a b le to u se a n o th e r p e rso n ’s c e ll p h o n e to
c a ll th e p o lic e . ¶4. R os enbaum al s o t est i fi ed and corr obor at ed m uch of D avi s ’ s t es t i m ony. She added thatw hen the w om en r ef us ed t o geti nt o t he car w i th the men, the t al l erm an w i th the gun,

“ ra c k e d th a t g u n a n d p u t it in m y fa c e a n d to ld m e B
-- -- , g e t i n t h e c a r o r I ’l l s h o o t y o u .” A n d it w a s o n ly a t th a t p o in t th a t th e w o m e n a g re e d to g e t i n to the ca r. A d d iti o n a lly , b o th R os enbaum and D avi s i den t i fi ed a gun a s one thatl ooked l i ke the one the t al l erm an w as hol di ng atthe t i m e of

cr i m es . N ei thercoul d def i ni t i vel y s ay i tw as t he s ame. R os enbaum
a lso tes tified th a t af

ter D a v is g a v e th e m $ 5 0 0 fro m th e A T M , the m e n talk e d a n d th e n to ld the w o m en they co u ld leav e, w h ich th e y d id b e c a u se the m en sti ll h ad the k ey s to the ca r. A ccor di ng t o he rt es t i m ony, both men w er e w ear i ng s ki m as ks w i th the hoodi es pul l ed t i ght
ar ound thei rf

ace s , and s he w as unabl e t o see t hei rf ace s . T he t al l erm an w i th the gun w as

### 5

w e a ri n g a d a rk -c o lo re d s k i m a s k , a n d th e o th e r m a n w a s w e a ri n g a ta n -c o lo re d s k i m a s k
. ¶5. J ones t es t i f

i ed next f or the St at e. A ccor di ng t o hi s t es t i m ony, he and Fox w er e i n t he Fam i l y D ol l ars t or e parki ng l ota w eek l at er, o n t he eveni ng of J anuary 17, 2012, w hen O f f i cerPatr i ck G al e of

the M er i di an Pol i ce D epart m ent , w ho t es t i f i ed t o thes e eve nt s l at er att r i al , pul l ed i n t he parki ng l ott o t al k w i th them. O f f i cerG al e t es t i f

i ed thatw hen he pul l ed i n t o the p arki ng l ot , one of the men, l at eri dent i f

i ed as Fox, dr opped s om ethi ng t o t he g ro u n d . O ffic e r G a le fris k e d Jo n e s a n d F o x , an d h e d isc o v e re d a g u n in F o x ’s c o a t p o c k e t. A tthatpoi nt , both J ones and Fox r an f r om O ff i cerG al e. J ones w as appr ehende d, butFox
m anage d t o es cape . F ox w as l at erappr ehende d by of f i cer s atan addr es s gi ven t o them by J ones . Fox was the c urr e ntb oy f r i e nd o f J on e s ’ s g i r l f

r i e nd ’ s d a ug ht e r , whom J on es of t en
r ef err ed t o as hi s s t epdaught er . O f f i cer s al s o ques t i on ed Jones aboutthe i nci dentt hat
o c c u rre d o n Ja n u a ry 1 0 , 2 0 1 2 , an d Jo n e s a d m itt e d th a t h e an d F o x w e re th e o n e s re sp o n sib le for th e c ri m es. H is t esti m o n y reg ard ing the e v en ts th at nig h t w ere that h e a n d F o x w ere
w al ki ng w hen Fox s aw D avi s and R os enbaum. Fox t ol d J ones , “ther e [ ar e] tw o l adi es over ther e, I gott o getthem. ” They puton the s ki m as ks and appr oache d the w om en. J ones t es t i f i ed thatFox ha d the gun a nd i m m edi at el y t ol d the w om en t o geti nt o the ca r , cal l i ng one
o f th em a “ B
--- -. ” J o n e s c o rrob o rated D av is’ s an d R o sen b au m ’s t esti m o n y that they w ere t aken t o an A T M w here F ox g ot outof the vehi cl e t o getm oney f r om the A T M , butw as unabl e t o do s o w i thoutD avi s’ s as s i s t ance . J ones t es t i f i ed thatonce D avi s gotthe money f r om the A T M , Fox t ook the m oney and D avi s ’ s c el l phone
. J ones al s o pos i t i vel y i dent i f i ed the gun O f

f i cerG al e r ecove r ed f

r om F ox as the gun thatw as us ed on the ni ghtof J anuary 10, 2 0 1 2 , fo r t h e a rm e d ro b b e ry , a rm e d c a rj a c k in g , a n d k id n a p p in g s .

### 6

¶ 6
. Jo n e s a lso in fo rm e d th e ju ry th a t h is tes tim o n y w a s th e tru th a n d w a s c o n sis ten t w ith the ver s i on of

event s he t ol d pol i ce off i cers , b uthe w as of

f er ed a de al f

r om the St at e i f

he tes tified a g a in st F o x . H e e x p lain e d th a t he w a s o ffe re d , a s p a rt o f a p lea d e a l, fo rty y e a rs in th e c u sto d y o f th e M D O C , w ith tw e n ty y e a rs su sp e n d e d . H e b e liev e d h e w o u ld se rv e tw e n ty y e a rs w ith th e first te n b e in g se rv e d d a y -fo r-d a y , an d th e n h e b e liev e d h e w o u ld b e e lig ib le f orearned- t i m e r el eas e on t he ot herhal f
. A ddi t i onal l y, he w oul d be pl ace d on f i ve yea r s of pr obat i on. O n cr os s - exami nat i on, J ones a cknow l edged thathe w as a pr evi ous l y convi ct ed f el on and w ou l d r e c e i ve l i f e s e nt e nc e s i f

h e wentt o tr i a l a nd was c on vi c t e d of a ny o f t he ch arg es stem m ing from the c ri m es o f Ja n u ary 1 0 , 2 0 1 2
. H e fu rth er a ck n o w ledg ed that p art of hi s pl ea deal r equi r ed thathe t es t i f y truthf ul l y a nd c ons i s t ent l y w i th h i s pr evi ous
s t at ement s orhe w oul d l os e hi s pl ea de al
. H ow ever , he deni ed t hat t his w as the r eas on he tes tified th e w a y h e d id . Jo n e s w a s a lso c ro ss -e x a m in e d o n lette rs p u rp o rte d ly w ritten b y h im
w h ile h e w a s in ja il; h o w e v e r, h e d e n ie d e v e r w ri tin g th e le tte rs . ¶ 7 . On r e d i r e c t e x a mi n a t i o n b y th e S t a t e , J o n e s wa s a s k e d wh y F o x wa s th e f i r s tn a me thatcame t o hi s head w hen he w as bei ng i nt err ogat ed by the pol i ce. J ones r es ponded: “B eca us e w hen w e gotarr es t ed, D et ect i ve M ann i ng [ ( s i c) ] had brung [ ( s i c) ] hi s name up. D et ect i ve M anni ng s ai d he [ ( Fox) ] w as on paper s f or t w o ar m ed r obbery char ges . ” Fox im m ed iat ely re q u ested a b en ch co n feren ce , foll o w ing w h ich th e jury w as ex cu sed t o th e jury
r oom . Fox m oved f

ora m i s tr i al bas ed upon J ones ’ s s t at ementthatFox w as “on pape r s f or tw o a rm e d ro b b e ry c h a rg e s,” a s it v io late d th e ju d g e ’s o rd e r o n th e m o tio n in lim in e n o t to
m ake any r ef

er ence t o Fox’ s pr i ororpe ndi ng f el ony char ges . T he ci r cui tcourtadmoni s hed J ones t o r ef

r ai n f r om any r ef

er ence t o Fox’ s pr i orba d a ct s . T he ci r cui tcourtf ur thernot ed

### 7

thati tdi d notbel i eve the t es t i m ony w as i nt ent i onal on the partof the St at e orJ ones , and that J ones “f el tl i ke [ he] w as bei ng re s pons i ve. . . . I don’ tthi nk the j ury thoughtanythi ng about it , g iven the to n e o f vo ice tha t w as sp o k en . ” A d d it ion ally , in o v e rru li n g the m o ti o n for a
m i s tr i al , the ci r cui tcourts ai d: “I don’ tthi nk i tw as pr ej udi ci al t o the poi ntw her e a mi s tr i al i s r equi r ed. H ow ever , . . . I w i l l admoni s h the j ury t o di s r egar d any r ef er ence t o any
r evoca t i on orany other
. . . paper s . . . f ortw o a r m ed r obber i es . ” H e al s o gave Fox the opt i on to d e c lin e g iv in g th e ju ry th e in str u c tio n to d isre g a rd if h e fe lt th a t itw o u ld e m p h a siz e it f ur t her , whi c h Fox r e f

us e d. The c i r c ui tc ou r td i r e c t e d the j ury t o “ t ot a l l y di s r e ga r d a ny
r ef er ence t o ‘ paper s ’ as i tr ef er s t o [ Fox]
. ” T he j ury w as pol l ed and una ni m ous l y af f i r m ed th a t th e y c o u ld d is re g a rd th e s ta te m e n t. ¶8. A s not ed above , O f f i cerG al e al s o t es t i f

i ed f orthe St at e. H e t es t i f

i ed thathe r ece i ved
a ca l l f r om pol i ce di s pat ch t o i nves t i gat e tw o s us pi ci ous m al es i n the parki ng l otof the Fam i l y D ol l arst or e on H i ghw ay 45. A ccor di ng t o hi m , w hen he appr oache d the men i n t he parki ng l oton J anuary 17, 2012, he sa w F ox dr op s om ethi ng. T hi s i t em w as l at err ecove r ed by O f f i cerG al e, and i tw as a s ki m as k and a “ doo- r ag. ” The 9m m Sm i th and W es s on gun O f f i cerG al e r ecove r ed f

r om Fox’ s coatpocketw as i ntr oduced a nd ent er ed i nt o evi dence d u ri n g h is t esti m o n y . F o ll o w ing O ffi ce r G ale’s testi m o n y , the S tat e re sted it s ca se-in-c h ief, and Fox m oved f

ora di r ect ed ver di ct , s peci f i cal l y as t o the arm ed- car j acki ng char ge. T he
c ir c u it c o u rt o v e rr u le d F o x ’s m o tio n fo r a d ir e c te d v e rd ic t. ¶9
. F o x call ed his fi rst w itn ess: A u g u st F o x , h is sist er. A u g u st test if ied th at on Jan u ary 10, 2012, s he dr ove Fox t o M er i di an f orhi m t o m eethi s gi rl fr i end ; s he w as w i th hi m t he ent i r e day atthei rmot her ’ s hous e; a nd s he al s o dr ove hi m home thats ame night
. W hen

### 8

pr es s ed by the St at e on cr os s - exami nat i on as t o w hy s he w oul d be abl e t o r emem berthatday
s o c l ear l y a s oppos ed t o otherda ys , A ugus ts t at ed s he r emem ber ed thats he w as of f w or k t hat day, s pendi ng t i m e w i th herchi l dr en, an d “w hateve rm e and my chi l dr en do, I r emem ber tho se days. ” T he S t at e t hen a sk ed w hen her nex tday off aft er J anu ary 10, 2012 , w as. A u g u s t r e s p o n d e d it w a s p ro b a b ly J a n u a ry 1 5 , 2 0 1 2 , b u t it w a s ju s t a g u e s s . ¶10. Fox cal l ed s ever al other w i tnes s es , al l f el l ow i nm at es . E l t on Fai r l ey t es t i f i ed thathe
w as i n an adj oi ni ng zone t o J ones and overhear d J ones t al ki ng t o K enneth J or dan thr ough a
s t eel doo rs e pa r a t i ng the z on e s . Fa i r l e y t e s t i f i e d he o ve rhe a r d J on e s t e l l J or da n tha the
comm i t t ed the cr i m es w i th s om eone named W ayne. Fai r l ey al s o t es t i f i ed thathe s aw a l ett er J ones pas s ed t o J or dan thr ough the s i de of the doorthatJ ones w as goi ng t o s end an a t t or ney. H ow ever , Fai r l ey f

ur therexpl ai ned thathe coul d nots ee t hr ough the doort o know i tw as Jo n e s th a t p a ss e d th e lette r, b u t h e c o u ld re c o g n ize h is v o ice
. Ja c o b y P ick e tt t e stifie d n e x t. H e s t a t e d he d i d no tk no w Fo x, e ve n tho ug h the y w e r e i n the s a me z on e i n the j a i l , buthe kn ew Jones fr om ou t si de o f j ai l , and they w ou l d tal k thr ou gh the d oo r s eparat i ng the zo nes. A ccor di ng t o Pi ckett , J ones t ol d hi m he com m i t t ed a cr i m e t hathe al s o bl amed on Fox, and J ones w as pl anni ng on w r i t i ng a l et t er t o the St at e i nf or m i ng i tthatFox w as noti nvol ved. N ext , Fox cal l ed D emar kei o Pr i t chett . Pr i t chettt es t i f i ed thathe knew Fox and J ones , and th a t h e w a s in th e sa m e z o n e a s F o x . P ritch e tt sa id th a t Jo n e s to ld h im F o x w a s n o t w ith h im
a t th e tim e o f th e c rim e s a n d w a s n o t in v o lv e d . P ritch e tt also tes tified th a t Jo n e s s h o w e d h im a l ett erhe had w r i t t en t o r eca nthi s s t at ementthatFox w as i nvol ved. Pr i t chettnever p e rso n a lly re a d a n y lette r Jo n e s s e n t th ro u g h th e d o o r. O n c ro ss -e x a m in a tio n , P ritch e tt t est i fi ed thatJones t old hi m he co m m i t t ed the c ri m es by h i m sel f. L avo n T uck er al so

### Att ac hed t o Fox’s se cond m oti on was a copy of J ones ’s swor n guilty- ple a pe ti ti on 3 

### fi le d on August

15, 2013. In i t, Jone s of fe re d to plead g uiltyto arm ed robber y in an open or b lindplea, w ith th e State reco mmend ing a maximum, or “cap ,” of fifteenyears to initially serve, b ut th e ultimate sentence w ou ld b e decid ed b y th e circuit co urt. 9 t es t i f i ed; how ever , hi s t es t i m ony w as thathe a nd J ones t al ked abouthi s c har ges , butJ ones
n e v e r m e n tio n e d F o x . F o x v o lu n ta ri ly c h o s e n o t to te s tif y . ¶1 1. T he St at e cal l ed Jone s on r ebut t al
. J on e s t e s t i f i e d tha the di d n otkn ow Fa i r l e y, Pi ckett , P r i t chett , or Tucker
. A nd he sai d he neverhad a conver s at i on w i th any of them and d e n ie d s lid in g a n y le tte r t h ro u g h a d o o r. ¶1 2. A f

t erhear i ng al l t he t es t i m ony a nd e vi de nc e pr e s e nt e d, the j ury d e l i be r at ed and
r eturned a ve r di ctf

i ndi ng Fox gui l t y on all count s . Pr i ort o hi s s ent enci ng, Fox f i l ed a
m ot i on f ora new tr i al , w hi ch t he ci r cui tcour tdeni ed on June 11, 2013. Fox w as s ent ence d on A ugus t8, 2013, as a habi tual off enderpurs uantt o sec t i on 99- 19- 83, t o l i f e i n the cus t ody of the M D O C on e a c h of the f ou rc ou nt s . Fox ’ s l i f

e s e nt e nc e s wer e o r de r e d t o r un
concurr ent l y t o one another , butcons ecut i vel y t o pr evi ous l y i m pos ed s ent ence s . T he
s ent enci ng or der s w er e f i l ed on A ugus t9, 2013. Fox f i l ed hi s not i ce of

appeal on A ugus t13, 2013, and the r ecor d w as de s i gnat ed. T hen, on A ugus t29, 2013, Fox f i l ed a s econd mot i on f ora new t r i al
. I n i t , he cl ai m ed thatJ ones ’ s t es t i m ony w as i ns trum ent al i n Fox’ s convi ct i on. J ones t es t i f

i ed attr i al thathi s s ent ence w oul d be f or ty year s , w i th tw enty suspend ed, t en year s t o s erve day- f

or - day, and el i gi bi l i ty f

orearned- r el eas e s upervi s i on af t erthat , and Fox claim s the se n tenc e Jo n es ac tually re ce ived w o u ld su b ject Jo n es to n o m o re tha n fi ft ee n y ea rs of i nit i al i ncar cer at i on. Fur ther , Fox cl ai m ed he w as “neve rnot i f i ed that[ J ones ’ s ] of

f er 3
w oul d change bas ed on how w el l he t es t i f i ed f orthe St at e. ” A ccor di ng t o the mot i on, Fox

### 10

w as n o t pro v ided a m ea n ing ful o p p o rtu n ity to co n fron t Jon es; the S tat e c o m m itted d isco v ery
v io latio n s b y fa ili n g to in fo rm F o x o f Jo n e s’s se n ten c in g c h a n g e ; an d F o x w a s d e n ied h is
r i ghtt o a f

ai rtr i al
. T he ci r cui tc our ts um m ar i l y de ni ed Fox’ s s econd mot i on f ora new tr i al on A ugus t29, 2013. ¶13
. O n ap peal, F ox rai ses tw o is sues: I. T h e [circu it ] co u rterred in [de n y ing F o x ’s m o ti o n fo r a m istri al after] al l ow i ng the [ St at e] t o el i ci tevidenc e of cr i m es otherthan the cr i m es c h a rg e d in th e in d ictm e n t. I I . T he [ ci r cui t ] courterr ed i n denyi ng F ox’ s m ot i on fora new tr i al bas ed on the new l y[ ] di s cover ed r educe d s ent ence of hi s al l eged a ccompl i ce. A N A L Y S IS I . ADM I S S I ON OF EVI DENCE O F OTHER BAD ACTS ¶1 4
. F o x first arg u es tha t the c ir cu itco u rterred i n fai li n g t o gra n t a m istria l w h e n , in
r es pons e t o the St at e’ s ques t i on as t o w hy Fox’ s name came up duri ng i nt err ogat i on, J ones t es t i f i ed tha tthe po l i c e br ou gh tup Fox ’ s na me be c a us e he w a s “ on pa pe r s ” f ortw o o ther
cr i m es . “W hethert o gr anta mot i on f ora mi s tr i al i s w i thi n the s ound di s cr et i on of the tr i al
c o u rt . T h e sta n d a rd o f r e v ie w fo r d e n ia l o f a m o tio n fo r [a ] m is tr ia l is a b u s e o f d is c re tio n .” G u n n v . S ta te , 56 So. 3d 568, 571 ( ¶14) ( M i s s . 2011) ( quot i ng C a sto n v . S ta te , 823 So. 2d 4 7 3 , 4 9 2 (¶ 5 4 ) ( M is s . 2 0 0 2 ))
. ¶15. Pr i ort o tr i al , the ci r cui tcourtent er ed an a gr eed or dergra nt i ng Fox’ s m ot i on i n l i m i ne t o excl ude r ef

er ence s t o any of

Fox’ s pr i orconvi ct i ons orpendi ng fel ony char ges . T he fol l ow i ng dial og ue took p l ace du ri ng the S t at e’s redi rectof Jones: S T A T E : N o w , in re sp o n se to o n e o f M s. M c N a ir’s q u e stio n s[,] sh e sa id

di d you i m pl i cat e ors ay thatQ ui ncy Fox w as w i th you, and that

### 11 w a s th e firs t n a m e th a t c a m e to y o u r h e a d , a n d y o u a g re e d w ith h er? J ONES : Ye s , ma ’ a m. ST A T E : W hy w as thatthe f i r s tname t hatcame t o yourhead? J O N E S: B eca us e w hen w e gotarr es t ed[ , ] D et ect i ve M anni ng [ ( s i c) ] had

b run g [(sic)] h is na m e u p . D etec ti v e M an n ing said h e [(F o x )] w as on p apers f

or tw o arm ed robb ery charges. I m m edi at el y, F ox re ques t ed a bench conf er ence , t he j ury w as excus ed, and Fox m oved f or
a m istri al f

or the viol at i on of the m oti on i n l i m i ne rul i ng . In denying the m oti o n for a
m i s tr i al , the ci r cui tcourts t at ed: [ W ] hatw e ar e dea l i ng w i th her e i s s om ebody [ ( J ones ) ] thatyou have pr oven qui t e cl earhas been t ot al l y i m m er s ed i n the cr i m i nal j us t i ce s ys t em si nce 1990, and her e w e ar e i n 2013.
. . . I don’ tbel i eve w hatI hear d w as an i nt enti on al th in g . I t h in k it w a s s o m e th in g th a t h e f e lt lik e w a s b e in g re s p o n s iv e . . . . I don’ tthi nk the j ury thoughta nythi ng a bouti tgi ven the t one of voi ce thatw as s poken. I under s t and the mot i on; how ever , I don’ tthi nk i tw as pr ej udi ci al t o the poi nt w her e a mi s tr i al i s r equi r ed. T he ci r cui tcourti ns truct ed the l ay w i tnes s , J ones , t o a voi d a ny otherment i on of Fox’ s pr i or
c o n v ictio n s o r p e n d in g fe lo n y c h a rg e s. T h e c irc u it c o u rt a lso a d m o n ish e d th e ju ry “ to to tally di s r egar d any r ef

er ence t o ‘paper s ’ as i tre f er s t o [ Fox]
. ” T he j ury w as pol l ed, and ea ch j ur or
a ff ir m e d h e o r s h e c o u ld d is re g a rd th e s ta te m e n t. ¶16. A s w e f

ound i n H

a n c o c k v . S ta te , 964 So. 2d 1167, 1179 ( ¶27) ( M i s s . C t . A pp. 2007) ( quot i ng H

o b so n v . S ta te , 7 3 0 S o . 2 d 2 0 , 2 4 (¶ 1 0 ) (M iss. 1 9 9 8 ), “[w ] h ere the w itn ess re fers br i ef l y t o a notherc r i m e, a nd the t es t i m ony w as notpurpos el y e l i ci t ed by the di s tr i ctatt or ney to p rov e the d efe n d an t' s ch ara cter, n o rev ersible e rror o cc u rs. ” A “tri al j u d g e sh o u ld d ec lare

### 12

a mi s tr i a l when a p r oc e du r a l e r r orr e s ul t s i n s ub s t a nt i a l a nd i rr e pa r a bl e p r e j ud i c e t o t he
acc us ed. ” P ittm a n v . S ta te , 928 So. 2d 244, 249 ( ¶11) ( M i s s . C t . A pp. 2006) ( ci t i ng G ar dner
v . S ta te , 792 S o. 2d 1000, 1003 ( ¶5) ( M i s s . C t . A pp. 2001) )
. “W hen s er i ous damage does not
r es ul t , the j udge s houl d a dm oni s h the j ury t o di s r egar d the i m pr opr i ety. ” I d. at( ¶12) ( ci t i ng Ho o p s v . S ta te , 6 8 1 S o . 2 d 5 2 1 , 5 2 8 (M iss. 1 9 9 6 )). A n d “[i ] t i s p resu m ed that the ju ry f ol l ow ed the i ns truct i on of the tr i al j udge t o di s r egard t he remar k. ” I d. ( ci t i ng D ennis v. S ta te , 5 5 5 S o . 2 d 6 7 9 , 6 8 2 -8 3 (M is s . 1 9 8 9 ))
. ¶17. J ones ’ s s i ngul ar and br i ef r ef er ence t o Fox’ s cr i m i nal r ecor d w as not the r es ul t of t he St at e’ s a t t e mptt o e l i c i te vi de nc e e xc l ud e d by the mot i on i n l i mi ne . The c i r c ui tc ou r tt hen i ns truct ed the j ury t o di s r egar d the s t at ement , w hi ch the j ury agr eed i tcoul d and w oul d do. W e do notsee t hatF ox w as s er i ous l y damaged by the s t at ement , orthats om e s ubs t ant i al or i rr epar abl e pr ej udi ce oc curr ed. O uranal ys i s of the r ecor d bef

or e us pr ovi des no evi dence th a t th e c ir c u it c o u rt a b u s e d its d is c re tio n in d e n y in g F o x ’s m o tio n fo r a m is tr ia l. ¶ 1 8
. T h is iss u e is w ith o u t m e rit. I I . DE NI AL OF F OX’ S S EC OND M OTI ON F OR A NE W TR I AL ¶19. Fox next ar gu es t hat t he ci r cui t court err ed i n denyi ng hi s s econd m ot i on f or a new tr i al bas ed on t he al l eged cha nge i n Jones ’ s sent ence fr om w hathe t es t i f i ed t o attr i al
. Fox f i l ed hi s f i r s tm ot i on f

ora new tr i al on J une 10, 2013. T he ci r cui tcour tdeni ed thi s m ot i on on J une 11, 2013. Fox w as then s ent ence d on A ugus t8, 2013, and he f i l ed his not i ce of app eal on A ug ust13 , 20 13
. F ox d i d no tfi l ed his secon d m oti on fora new tri al un t i l A ug ust 29, 2013, w hich w as af t erthe dat e he f

i l ed hi s not i ce of

appea l
. I ti s w el l s ett l ed that“the f i l i ng of the not i ce of

appea l per fect ed the appe al and di ves t ed the l ow ercour tof

### 13

j ur i s di ct i on. ” Este s v . S ta te , 782 So. 2d 1244, 1248 ( ¶2) ( M i s s . C t . A pp. 2000) ( ci t i ng Ma rtin
v . S ta te , 7 3 2 S o . 2 d 8 4 7 , 8 5 1 (M iss . 1 9 9 8 )). B e c a u se th e c irc u it co u rt lac k e d ju risd ictio n to
cons i derFox’ s s econd mot i on f ora new tr i al , w e al s o l ack j ur i s di ct i on t o cons i dert he
m ot i on. ¶ 2 0
. THE J UDG M ENT OF THE CI RCU I T COU RT OF LAUD ERDALE CO UNTY OF CON VI CTI ON OF ON E COUN T OF ARM ED CAR J ACK I NG , TW O C OU NTS OF KI DNAP P I NG, AND ONE COUNT OF ARM ED ROBB ER Y AND S EN TE NCE AS A HABI TUAL O FF ENDER O F LI FE I M PRI S ON M EN T O N EACH CO UNT, W I TH AL L S EN TE NCE S T O RUN CONCU RRE NT LY TO ONE ANOT HER A ND CONS EC UT I VE LY TO P RE VI OUS LY I M P OS ED S EN TE NCE S , I S AF F I RM ED . A L L C O S T S O F T H I S A P P E A L A R E A S S E S S E D T O L A U D E R D A L E C O U N T Y . LE E, C. J . , I RVI NG AN D GRI F F I S , P . J J . , B ARNE S , I S HEE , CAR LTON, M AXW EL L, F AI R AND J AM ES , J J . , CONCUR.