Jackson Jambalaya

JPD catches them while the Hinds County criminal justice system does its darndest to turn them loose.  The Mississippi Court of Appeals reversed the conviction of  Kadarius White and sent his case back to circuit court for a new trial.  The District Attorney had a recording of White confessing his crimes to his girlfriend for two years but did not tell the defendant about the recording's existence until the morning of the trial's first day.  Judge Winston Kidd did not grant a continuance to White so he could review the evidence.


White went on a crime spree back in 2013:

¶4. In August 2013, a Hinds County grand jury returned a nine-count indictment against White. The  indictment alleged as follows: On April 7, 2013, White used a gun to take Scott Penman’s wallet and cell phone (Count I – armed robbery) and white Toyota Corolla (Count II – armed carjacking). On April 22, 2013, White used a gun to take Shelley Davis’s purse (Count III – armed robbery) and Jeep Cherokee (Count IV – armed carjacking). On April 22, 2013, White also used a gun to take LaQuinta Thomas’s purse (Count V – armed robbery) and Honda Civic (Count VI – armed carjacking). On April 23, 2013, White used a gun to take Destiny Taylor’s wallet and cash (Count VII – armed robbery) and Ford Fusion (Count VIII – armed carjacking). And on April 24, 2013, White possessed a Hyundai Sonata that had been stolen from Tabitha Bailey and that White knew or had reasonable grounds to know that the vehicle was stolen (Count IX –  possession of stolen property).

 Following a jury trial, White was convicted of two counts of armed robbery, two counts of armed carjacking, and possession of stolen property. He was sentenced to four terms of twenty-five years and one term of ten years, all to be served concurrently in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections.

One bad dude.  However, even bad dudes have rights and are protected from trial by ambush.  The Court stated:

Just prior to opening statements, the district attorney disclosed that the State possessed approximately ninety-five minutes of recorded phone conversations involving White, and the State intended to introduce unspecified parts of the recordings, including an alleged “confession,” into evidence at trial. The recordings had been in the State’s possession for two years, but despite a specific discovery request by White, the State had failed to disclose their existence. The trial judge delayed opening statements just long enough for White’s attorney to listen to the recordings but denied White’s request for a continuance or mistrial.

White arrested in April 2013 and held at the Simpson County jail. Hinds County was forced to ship its prisoners to neighboring jurisdictions after inmates destroyed pod C in a riot at the Raymond Detention Center at the time.   White was dumb enough to call his girlfriend on the jailhouse phones and discuss his criminal activities:

thereafter. Within a few days of White’s arrest, Captain Fred Williams of the Simpson County Sheriff’s Department obtained recordings of phone calls placed by White from the jail to an unidentified female. Captain Williams notified JPD Detective Williams of the evidence, and Detective Williams and Detective West promptly traveled to Simpson County to retrieve the recordings. Detective Williams testified that he recognized White’s voice on the recordings...

The District Attorney tried to place the blame on JPD:

On Monday, May 4, 2015, a jury was selected. At the end of the day, the judge told the jurors and the parties to report back ready to begin trial at 9 a.m. The next morning, just before opening statements, the district attorney announced: “This morning, Your Honor, we received a CD. . . where Mr. White was recorded from the Simpson County jail speaking to his girlfriend, and he also basically confessed to committing certain crimes in this case. The defendant did not get this because we just received [it] this morning.” In response to the judge’s questions, the district attorney admitted that although he claimed that he had “just received” the CD, it had been in Detective West’s possession for two years. Defense counsel informed the judge that the district attorney’s announcement was the “first time” he had heard about the CD.....

They sparred back and forth but Judge Kidd allowed the prosecution to play excerpts of the recordings in court.  The D.A. didn't even provide a list of excerpts until 8:59 AM on the day they were presented in the courtroom.
The recorded conversations were rather damning (Read #20 on page 10 in the opinion posted below for the actual conversations.).   However,  the Court gutted the D.A.'s attempt to blame JPD:

the explanation given for the discovery violation does not hold up.  The district attorney claimed that the CD was overlooked because it was “part of a number of investigations,” all related and involving White. In other words, the CD was relevant to so many cases that the State forgot that it should be produced to the person recorded, who was under indictment in five such cases. Even White’s specific discovery request in January 2014 did not prompt the State to correct this regrettable “oversight.” Only sixteen months later, after a jury was selected and just prior to opening statements, did the State suddenly realize that it should turn over the CD to White. It is difficult to imagine a clearer violation of Rule 9.04.

The Court said the rule is supposed to prevent "trial by ambush" and it was clearly violated in this case.  It said the defense based a substantial part of its argument on an inability of the police to link the guns to White.  However, the recordings "seriously undermined"  that claim and did so with no warning to the defense.  Meanwhile, the prosecution ran up and down the field with the recordings in its closing arguments as Mr. Smith argued White confessed in the recordings.

Kingfish note: Total incompetence all the way around but hey, this is what the voters of Hinds County want. 


*Rule 9.04:

If during the course of trial, the prosecution attempts to introduce evidence which has not been timely disclosed to the defense as required by these rules, and the defense objects to the introduction for that reason, the court shall act as follows:

1. Grant the defense a reasonable opportunity to interview the newly discovered witness, to examine the newly produced documents, photographs or other evidence; and

2. If, after such opportunity, the defense claims unfair surprise or undue prejudice and seeks a continuance or mistrial, the court shall, in the interest of justice and absent unusual circumstances, exclude the evidence or grant a
continuance for a period of time reasonably necessary for the defense to meet the non-disclosed
evidence or grant a mistrial.

3. The court shall not be required to grant either a continuance or mistrial for such a discovery violation if the prosecution withdraws its efforts to introduce such evidence.