Opinion ID: 1654062
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 24

Heading: Juror Denmark worked with Davis's mother but failed to reveal this fact during voir dire.

Text: ¶ 57. Jeffrey Keller Davis argues next that Terri Denmark, who served on his jury, failed to answer a question during voir dire which would have caused her to be stricken for cause, resulting in reversible error. District Attorney Harkey asked at the beginning of his voir dire: Now, does anybody know Mr. Davis, the defendant in this particular case? Anybody know him? Does anybody know Mr. Davis' family. I believe some family members may be seated out in the audience. Davis's mother, Christine Davis, was employed as a nurse at the South Mississippi Correctional Facility in Greene County. Christine Davis stated in her affidavit attached to Davis's Application that Terri Denmark worked with me at the prison as a security officer but did not reveal knowing me. The affidavit states nothing about the nature of the working relationship or the frequency of contact between the two. Davis argues that if he had known about the relationship then she [Denmark] would have been struck from the jury for cause. ¶ 58. Miss.Code Ann. § 99-39-21 (1994) states in part: (1) Failure by a prisoner to raise objections, defenses, claims, questions, issues or errors either in fact or law which were capable of determination at trial and/or on direct appeal, regardless of whether such are based on the laws and the Constitution of the state of Mississippi or of the United States, shall constitute a waiver thereof and shall be procedurally barred, but the court may upon a showing of cause and actual prejudice grant relief from the waiver. (2) The litigation of a factual issue at trial and on direct appeal of a specific state or federal legal theory or theories shall constitute a waiver of all other state or federal legal theories which could have been raised under said factual issue; and any relief sought under this chapter upon said facts but upon different state or federal legal theories shall be procedurally barred absent a showing of cause and actual prejudice. (3) The doctrine of res judicata shall apply to all issues, both factual and legal, decided at trial and on direct appeal. ¶ 59. Davis cites numerous cases from this Court where the relationship between the juror and the person in question, justifying striking the juror, was much closer than that of co-worker. See Taylor v. State, 656 So.2d 104 (Miss.1995)(juror was brother of assistant district attorney); Atkinson v. State, 371 So.2d 869 (Miss.1979)(juror had relative who was killed in similar manner to crime victim); Walls v. State, 371 So.2d 411 (Miss.1979)(juror's son was murder victim); Odom v. State, 355 So.2d 1381 (Miss.1978)(juror was brother of police investigator in the case in question). Because few of the details of the alleged relationship are provided, it is speculative as to whether a challenge for cause would have been justified. The State argues that, as this issue could have been raised on direct appeal and was not, it is waived and procedurally barred under § 99-39-21(1). The State further argues that the issue is speculative and Davis failed to show any prejudice merely because Denmark served as a juror. We agree that this issue is procedurally barred and without merit.