Curry v. The Victim Compensation Division

In 2018, Curtis Curry sent an application for compensation to the Victim Compensation Division of the Mississippi Attorney General’s Office. Curry’s claim arose from an aggravated assault that occurred on December 29, 2016, in Clarksdale, Mississippi. While Curry was in his home, two individuals entered his home, assaulted him at gunpoint, and stole $517. Curry was taken to a hospital via ambulance. After reviewing his petition, the Victim Compensation Division denied his claim on the ground that Curry was under the actual or constructive supervision of the Department of Corrections at the time of the assault, contrary to the requirements for compensation under Mississippi Code Section 99-41-17(1)(j) (Rev. 2020). Curry requested a contested hearing to dispute the Victim Compensation Division’s decision. At that hearing, Curry admitted he was on probation with the Mississippi Department of Corrections as of December 29, 2016, but assailed the constitutionality of Mississippi Code Section 99-41-17(1)(j) on the grounds that it was ambiguous and offensive to his rights under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. A hearing officer of the Victim Compensation Division entered an order denying Curry's application for compensation. Curry appealed a circuit court order dismissing his appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction. Curry argued the circuit court erred by determining it lacked jurisdiction due to his failure to file a cost bond as required by Mississippi Code Section 99-41-13(a) (Rev. 2020). In examining the case de novo, the Mississippi Supreme Court found the circuit court was correct to hold it lacked jurisdiction. Accordingly, judgment was affirmed.