Johnathan Nickson a/k/a Jonathan Nickson v. State of Mississippi

Citation: Not availableDocket: 2018-IA-01030-SCT

Court: Mississippi Supreme Court; March 26, 2020; Mississippi; State Supreme Court

Original Court Document: View Document

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentBackward CitatorAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

Johnathan Nickson faced charges of two counts of first-degree murder and possession of a firearm as a convicted felon. The jury acquitted him of the first-degree murder charges but was deadlocked regarding second-degree murder and the firearm charge, leading the trial court to declare a mistrial on those counts. The Supreme Court of Mississippi determined that the trial court erred by declaring a mistrial on the first-degree murder charges since Nickson was acquitted. Consequently, the Court reversed the trial court's mistrial order for the first-degree murder counts and rendered a judgment of acquittal for those charges. However, the Court affirmed the trial court’s decision regarding the second-degree murder and firearm possession charges, as the jury had not reached a final verdict on those counts. The case was remanded for further proceedings regarding the unresolved charges.

The jury was instructed on the verdict forms for two charges: Second Degree Murder (Count Two) and being a convicted felon in possession of a firearm (Count Three). They were to write their verdicts on a separate piece of paper, which need not be signed. During deliberations, the jury reported being deadlocked. The trial court confirmed they had reached a verdict on two counts, announcing a unanimous not guilty verdict for both first degree murder charges (Counts 1 and 2). The jury was then sent back to deliberate further.

Afterward, defense counsel requested a mistrial due to the jury being hopelessly deadlocked. The trial court denied this request, indicating it was premature, and instructed the jury to continue deliberations. An hour later, the jury again indicated they were deadlocked, leading the State and defense to jointly request a mistrial. The court decided to declare a mistrial on all counts, citing the jury's incomplete verdict on Counts 1 and 2 and no verdict on Count 3. 

Following the mistrial declaration, Nickson's counsel filed a motion to set aside the mistrial order regarding first-degree murder and sought a judgment of acquittal, which the trial court denied. Nickson then filed an interlocutory appeal, arguing that the jury's verdict was complete for all counts, that he could not be retried for first-degree murder due to acquittal, and that retrial for second-degree murder was also barred. The standard of review for the mistrial decision is based on whether there was an abuse of discretion.

The trial court declared a mistrial after the jury failed to reach a complete and unanimous verdict on all counts against Nickson, who was charged with first-degree murder. The court's finding was based on the jury returning an incomplete verdict for counts 1 and 2 and no verdict for count 3. However, the court's conclusion was contested, as Nickson argued that the jury's unanimous decision against guilt for first-degree murder constituted a complete verdict. The appellate court concurred, noting Mississippi Rule of Criminal Procedure 24.4(b) permits juries to deliver partial verdicts when they cannot agree on all counts. The jury had been instructed on both first-degree and second-degree murder, allowing them to find Nickson not guilty of first-degree murder while potentially finding him guilty of second-degree murder, which they did not agree upon.

The jury's written verdict confirmed their unanimous decision against first-degree murder, making it a complete verdict under the rule. Consequently, the court found that Nickson could not be retried for first-degree murder, as his acquittal on that charge would violate the Double Jeopardy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which protects individuals from being tried multiple times for the same offense. The Mississippi Constitution similarly enforces this protection, requiring an actual acquittal or conviction to bar retrial. The State attempted to counter this position by referencing the case Blueford v. Arkansas, which involved jury indecision, but the court did not find this applicable to Nickson's situation.

The jury reported being deadlocked after deliberating on several charges. The foreperson indicated a unanimous vote against guilt for both capital and first-degree murder, but the jury was unable to reach a decision on manslaughter and had not voted on negligent homicide. The trial court instructed the jury to continue deliberating, but they remained deadlocked and ultimately declared a mistrial. The Supreme Court determined that the foreperson's report did not constitute a final verdict of acquittal, as deliberations were ongoing, and thus a retrial for the same offenses was permissible under the Double Jeopardy Clause.

In contrast, the current case highlights key differences from the Blueford case. The jury had the option to deliver a partial verdict, which they did, reaching a unanimous decision on first-degree murder. The foreperson communicated a verdict in writing, which the court confirmed. Defense counsel’s motion for a mistrial on remaining charges indicated recognition of the finality of the verdict against guilt for first-degree murder. Therefore, the trial court concluded that a retrial for first-degree murder would violate Nickson’s constitutional right against double jeopardy, affirming that a final resolution had been reached on that charge.

Nickson contends that he cannot be retried for second-degree murder, arguing it is not a lesser-included offense of first-degree murder, despite acknowledging it is a lesser offense. The Court disagrees, citing precedents that classify second-degree murder as a lesser-included offense of first-degree murder. Therefore, Nickson's argument is rejected, allowing for a retrial on second-degree murder. 

The Court affirms the trial court's declaration of a mistrial for the lesser-included offenses of second-degree murder and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon due to the jury's inability to reach a unanimous verdict, indicating that the Double Jeopardy Clause does not prevent retrial on these charges. However, the jury's verdict provided finality, resulting in an acquittal on the two counts of first-degree murder, leading to the conclusion that the trial court improperly declared a mistrial on those charges. The Court reverses the mistrial order for first-degree murder, rendering a judgment of acquittal for Nickson on those counts, meaning he cannot be retried for the murders of Nedra Johnson or Bradley Adams. The decision is affirmed in part and reversed in part, with a remand for further proceedings.