Archie Hall v. State of Mississippi
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
NO. 2008-KA-01719-COA
ARCHIE HALL
APPELLANT
v.
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
APPELLEE
DATE OF JUDGMENT:
TRIAL JUDGE:
COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED:
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT:
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE:
DISTRICT ATTORNEY:
NATURE OF THE CASE:
TRIAL COURT DISPOSITION:
DISPOSITION:
MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED:
MANDATE ISSUED:
09/11/2008
HON. MARCUS D. GORDON
LEAKE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
EDMUND J. PHILLIPS JR.
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
BY: JOHN R. HENRY JR.
MARK SHELDON DUNCAN
CRIMINAL - FELONY
CONVICTED OF MANSLAUGHTER AND
SENTENCED TO EIGHTEEN YEARS IN
THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
AFFIRMED - 06/29/2010
BEFORE LEE, P.J., IRVING AND GRIFFIS, JJ.
LEE, P.J., FOR THE COURT:
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
¶1.
On September 11, 2008, a jury in the Leake County Circuit Court found Archie Hall
guilty of manslaughter. Hall was sentenced to serve eighteen years in the custody of the
Mississippi Department of Corrections. Hall now appeals, asserting the following issues:
(1) the trial court erred in denying his hearsay objection; (2) the trial court erred in denying
his request for a peremptory instruction; and (3) the trial court erred in refusing jury
instruction D-6.
FACTS
¶2.
At approximately ten o’clock on the night of August 30, 2007, the Leake County
Sheriff’s Department was dispatched to a local residence. Upon arrival at the scene, Chief
Deputy Mike Williams found a female on the floor of the residence with a gunshot wound
to her chest. The woman was identified as Shirley Jobe. Hall, Jobe’s boyfriend, was on the
floor beside Jobe holding her shoulders. Also present were Jobe’s mother, Willie Mae Jobe,
and Jobe’s six children, three of whom were fathered by Hall.
¶3.
Hall informed Deputy Williams that Jobe had been playing with a semi-automatic
handgun, and the gun discharged. Deputy Williams found the gun in the back room of the
residence. The gun was lying on an ice chest. The magazine, which was loaded, was next
to the gun.
¶4.
At the hospital, Michael Harper, an investigator with the Leake County Sheriff’s
Department, testified that Hall told him he was attempting to teach Jobe how to shoot the
gun, and it discharged. Greg Waggoner, Sheriff of Leake County, was present when Hall
was interviewed at the jail after his arrest. Sheriff Waggoner testified that initially Hall had
insisted that Jobe was playing with the gun, and it discharged. Sheriff Waggoner interrupted
Hall and informed him that the autopsy did not support this version of events. Hall then
informed Sheriff Waggoner that he and Jobe had been arguing that night about money. Hall
stated that Jobe grabbed the gun and pointed it at him. Hall said he then approached Jobe,
pushed the gun away from him, and attempted to grab the gun from her hand. Hall stated that
2
the gun then discharged. Hall reduced these statements to writing.
¶5.
Willie Mae testified that she was in her room sleeping when she heard Jobe call out,
“Willie, Archie shot me.” Willie Mae testified that Hall entered her room and admitted that
Jobe had been shot. Willie Mae stated that Hall told her to inform emergency services that
Jobe had been playing with the gun, and it had discharged. As Jobe was being transported
to the hospital, Hall purportedly told Willie Mae that they needed to get their stories straight
“because [Jobe] was playing with the gun and the gun went off, and I don’t want to go back
to jail.” Jobe died later that night.
¶6.
Dr. Steven Hayne, a forensic pathologist, performed the autopsy on Jobe and
concluded her death was a homicide. Dr. Hayne found no evidence of tattooing, smudging,
or flame injury on or around the gunshot wound. As a result of these findings, Dr. Hayne
determined that the bullet shot into Jobe’s upper left chest was at least one-and-one-half feet
away from Jobe’s body.
¶7.
Over Hall’s objection, Dawn Biggart testified that two days prior to her death, Jobe
came to Biggart’s place of employment. Biggart worked in a convenience store that Hall and
Jobe patronized. Biggart testified that Jobe said she had recently won a substantial amount
of money at a local casino, but she had spent it all at the casino. Jobe told Biggart that during
a telephone conversation with Hall, he had threatened to kill her over losing the money.
Biggart testified that Hall purportedly had told Jobe that he would kill her when he returned
from work. Hall worked for a barge company and would sometimes be gone for up to forty
days at a time. It is unclear as to when Hall made the statement to Jobe that he was going to
kill her. Hall did testify that he had spoken with Jobe to discuss where she would pick him
3
up from work on August 30.
Hall admitted that they had argued during this phone
conversation.
¶8.
One of Jobe’s daughters, Davonta Jobe, testified for the defense. Davonta had ridden
with Jobe that day to pick Hall up from work. Davonta testified that Jobe brought the gun
with her at Hall’s request. At some point during the ride home, Hall asked Davonta for the
gun. Davonta stated that she handed Hall the gun, and he placed it in the glove box. On
cross-examination, Davonta admitted that Hall took the gun out of the glove box when they
arrived home, but she did not see what he did with the gun. Jobe, Hall, and Davonta arrived
home approximately thirty to forty-five minutes prior to Jobe’s death. Davonta, who was in
the living room, heard a gunshot and then saw Jobe and Hall exit the back room. Davonta
stated that Jobe called out for Davonta’s brother, fell to the floor, and told Davonta to tell the
children that she loved them. Davonta said at one point, Jobe cried out, “Willie, I’ve been
shot.”
¶9.
Hall testified on his behalf. Hall stated that he did not know that Jobe had won money
at the casino. Hall testified that when he called Jobe to discuss arrangements to pick him up
from work, he did not threaten to kill her. Hall did admit that the two had “verbal words”
concerning the amount of money Jobe had been spending. Hall stated that he did put the gun
in the glove box, but he did not remove it.
DISCUSSION
I. HEARSAY
¶10.
In his first issue on appeal, Hall argues that the testimony of Biggart should have been
excluded. The admissibility of testimonial evidence is left to the sound discretion of the trial
4
court within the boundaries of the Mississippi Rules of Evidence, and the trial court will not
be found in error unless it has abused its discretion. Harris v. State, 861 So. 2d 1003, 1018
(¶41) (Miss. 2003). “Such error will warrant reversal only when the abuse of discretion has
resulted in prejudice to the accused.” Id.
¶11.
The trial court found that Biggart’s testimony was admissible as a present sense
impression. Rule 803(1) defines a present sense impression as “[a] statement describing or
explaining an event or condition made while the declarant was perceiving the event or
condition or immediately thereafter.” Jobe, the declarant, received a phone call from Hall
at some point prior to her death during which Hall purportedly threatened to kill her. Two
days prior to her death Jobe told Biggart about these threats. Hall admitted that he spoke
with Jobe in the days prior to her death, but he stated that he had called Jobe to discuss
arrangements to pick him up from work. Hall did admit to arguing with Jobe about money.
Since it is unclear from the record when Jobe received the allegedly threatening phone call
from Hall, Jobe’s statements to Biggart do not fall under the present-sense-impression
exception to the hearsay rule.
¶12.
But, we find the statements made by Jobe to Biggart fall under the hearsay exception
for then-existing mental condition or state of mind under Rule 803(3). Rule 803(3) has been
held to encompass relevant statements made by victims prior to their death. See Harris, 861
So. 2d at 1019 (¶42); Council v. State, 976 So. 2d 889, 901 (¶28) (Miss. Ct. App. 2007). We
do not reverse the trial court’s judgment if the right result is reached even though for the
wrong reason. This issue is without merit.
II. PEREMPTORY INSTRUCTION
5
¶13.
In his second issue on appeal, Hall argues that the trial court erred in refusing to grant
a peremptory instruction.
A peremptory instruction challenges the sufficiency of the
evidence. Jefferson v. State, 818 So. 2d 1099, 1110-11 (¶30) (Miss. 2002). “[T]he critical
inquiry is whether the evidence shows ‘beyond a reasonable doubt that accused committed
the act charged, and that he did so under such circumstances that every element of the offense
existed[.]’” Bush v. State, 895 So. 2d 836, 843 (¶16) (Miss. 2005) (citation omitted). If,
viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, any rational trier of fact could
have found, beyond a reasonable doubt, the essential elements of the crime existed, this Court
will affirm the denial of a peremptory instruction. Id. If we find that reasonable, fair-minded
jurors could have concluded that the defendant was guilty of the accused crime, the evidence
will be deemed sufficient. Id.
¶14.
Hall cites to Weathersby v. State, 165 Miss. 207, 209, 147 So. 481, 482 (1933) for the
proposition that if a defendant or his witnesses “are the only eyewitnesses to the homicide,
their version, if reasonable, must be accepted as true, unless substantially contradicted in
material particulars by a credible witness or witnesses for the [S]tate, or by the physical facts
or by the facts of common knowledge.”
However, the rule is inapplicable where a
defendant’s account of the homicide is unreasonable, contradicted by the physical facts, or
where the defendant has given conflicting versions of the homicide. Simpson v. State, 993
So. 2d 400, 407 (¶23) (Miss. Ct. App. 2008).
¶15.
Hall had several different versions of the shooting, all of which conflicted with the
physical facts of the case. Furthermore, Willie Mae testified that Jobe stated that Hall had
shot her and that Hall had asked her to inform the authorities that Jobe was playing with the
6
gun when it discharged. From the evidence, reasonable jurors could have found Hall guilty
of manslaughter. This issue is without merit.
III. JURY INSTRUCTION
¶16.
In his final issue on appeal, Hall argues that the trial court erred in refusing a
circumstantial-evidence jury instruction. “A circumstantial[-]evidence instruction must be
given unless there is some type of direct evidence such as eyewitness testimony, dying
declaration, or confession or admission of the accused.” Deal v. State, 589 So. 2d 1257,
1260 (Miss. 1991).
¶17.
We find that the trial court properly refused a circumstantial-evidence instruction
because Jobe’s statement prior to her death indicated that Hall had shot her, and Hall
admitted that he had shot Jobe, although in an effort to disarm her. This issue is without
merit.
¶18. THE JUDGMENT OF THE LEAKE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT OF
CONVICTION OF MANSLAUGHTER AND SENTENCE OF EIGHTEEN YEARS
IN THE CUSTODY OF THE MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS IS
AFFIRMED. ALL COSTS OF THIS APPEAL ARE ASSESSED TO LEAKE
COUNTY.
KING, C.J., MYERS, P.J., GRIFFIS, ISHEE AND ROBERTS, JJ., CONCUR.
MAXWELL, J., CONCURS IN PART AND IN THE RESULT. IRVING AND
BARNES, JJ., CONCUR IN RESULT ONLY.
CARLTON, J., NOT
PARTICIPATING.
7
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.