Opinion ID: 1654062
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 17

Heading: Counsel failed to request a special jury venire prior to trial date.

Text: ¶ 43. As stated earlier, this issue should be viewed in conjunction with Issue I(9). Davis argues that Shaddock was ineffective for failure to request a special venire to which he was entitled under Miss.Code Ann. § 13-5-77 (Supp.1998). In this case the State had moved for a special venire but withdrew the request before trial. Shaddock did not file such a motion, claiming that he had relied on the State's motion, and only made such a request at trial when he realized that a special venire had not been drawn. The venire in this case was impaneled a week prior to trial and was recalled to serve for the Davis trial. The circuit clerk stated that none of the venire in question had actually served on any case the prior week. On direct appeal this Court found that the issue was without merit because of the untimely request of Shaddock. Davis, 684 So.2d at 650. ¶ 44. The State answers that Davis cannot simply recast issues held to be without merit on direct appeal as ineffective assistance of counsel on the post-conviction level, citing Foster v. State, 687 So.2d 1124, 1129 (Miss.1996). We would agree except in a rare case such as this one, where the issue was held without merit solely because of the actions of counsel. This Court has held that failure to request a special venire may be a factor worthy of consideration in a successful ineffective assistance of counsel claim. See Triplett v. State, 666 So.2d 1356, 1361-62 (Miss.1995). We stated on direct appeal stated that there was no attempt on the part of Davis to suggest that he was prejudiced as a result of the circumstances. Davis, 684 So.2d at 650. Here Davis states under Issue I(9) that certain unknown members of his jury were in contact with the Assistant District Attorney at some unknown time prior to trial. If proven these allegations could amount to prejudice sufficient to amount to ineffective assistance of counsel under Strickland v. Washington . This Court finds that Davis should be granted leave to proceed in the trial court on Issues I(9) and I(13).