Luster v. State

Citations: 143 So. 3d 636; 2014 Miss. App. LEXIS 415; 2014 WL 3715504Docket: No. 2013-KA-00552-COA

Court: Court of Appeals of Mississippi; July 29, 2014; Mississippi; State Appellate Court

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentBackward CitatorAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

James Luster appeals his murder conviction and life sentence, claiming the verdict is against the overwhelming weight of evidence, alleging ineffective trial counsel, and arguing that the trial court erred in allowing jury instruction S-1. The court affirms the conviction. 

On March 6, 2012, Carlos “Moe” Wright was shot multiple times at home. Neighbor David Ross heard the gunshots and saw two men flee but could not identify them. Officer Elvis Prater, responding to the scene, encountered Cedrick Jones loading Moe’s body into a vehicle. Jones claimed he was taking Moe to the hospital, but Moe was unresponsive. 

Investigator Otis Mozique arrived, observed the crime scene, and collected bullet casings. He later sought to question Jones, who provided information leading officers to Luster’s address, but Luster was not found initially. Luster turned himself in the next day, claiming he was in Vidalia, Louisiana, at the time of the murder.

Witness Alexis Williams testified that Luster borrowed her car around the time of the shooting, later confessing to her that he had shot Moe during a robbery attempt. Initially, Alexis provided an alibi for Luster but later admitted she had lied due to fear of him, ultimately incriminating him. Luster was arrested and charged with Moe’s murder based on the evidence and witness testimonies.

Ethel testified that Luster visited her while she was at work from 5:00 p.m. to 9:30 p.m. Upon her return, Luster was at her house and left around 10:30 p.m. Ethel later took Luster to the police station on March 7, although he did not disclose the reason for this visit. Hunt recounted that on March 6, between 10:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m., Luster arrived while he and others were shooting dice. Luster acquired a .40 caliber gun from Gerry Byrd and subsequently drove Hunt and Davis to Moe's house. An argument ensued between Luster and Moe, leading to Luster shooting Moe. Hunt fled the scene, while Davis, under Luster's coercion, shot Moe twice. After the incident, Luster instructed Davis and Hunt to remain silent about the shooting, threatening them if they did not comply. All three were charged with Moe's murder on July 23, 2012, and Luster was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment on January 29-30, 2013. Following his conviction, Luster filed for a new trial, which the court denied, prompting his appeal. Luster contends that the evidence does not support a premeditated murder conviction and, at most, suggests a manslaughter charge. He was charged under Mississippi law regarding deliberate killings without legal authority.

The jury was instructed to determine if Luster "willfully, unlawfully, feloniously, and with deliberate design" killed Moe by shooting him, with "deliberate design" defined as an intentional act to kill, indicating full awareness and careful consideration of consequences, although it could be formed quickly but not at the moment of the act. Additionally, the jury received instructions on manslaughter, which is characterized as a killing without malice in a heated moment or using a dangerous weapon without lawful justification. 

In reviewing a motion for a new trial based on evidence weight, the court only overturns a verdict when it is contrary to the overwhelming evidence, assessing the evidence favorably to the verdict without reassessing credibility. The jury had to choose between murder and manslaughter based on conflicting testimonies; Alexis and Ethel claimed Luster was not present at the time of the murder, while his codefendants testified that they witnessed him shoot Moe. The court found the verdict was not unjust based on the evidence presented.

Luster also claimed ineffective assistance of counsel, contending that his attorney failed to object to a jury instruction and did not request caution regarding the codefendants’ testimonies. To establish ineffective assistance, Luster must demonstrate both that his counsel's performance was deficient and that this deficiency prejudiced his defense, with a strong presumption favoring reasonable professional assistance. He must show a reasonable probability that, absent the errors, the outcome would have been different.

A claim of ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal is evaluated under two conditions: (1) the record must clearly demonstrate constitutional ineffectiveness, or (2) both parties must agree that the record is sufficient for appellate review without relying on the trial judge's factual findings. The focus is not on whether counsel was ineffective but rather if the trial judge had a legal obligation to declare a mistrial or order a new trial due to inadequate counsel, which must be egregiously incompetent to warrant such action.

If the appellate court does not reverse for other reasons and cannot determine ineffective assistance of counsel, it will affirm the conviction while allowing the defendant to pursue this issue in post-conviction proceedings. The review of such claims is limited to the existing record. In this case, the court found no affirmative evidence of constitutional ineffectiveness in the record and the parties did not agree on the sufficiency of the record for appellate determination, leading to an affirmation of the ineffective assistance claim without prejudice.

Additionally, Luster argued that the trial court erred in granting jury instruction S-1, which he claimed allowed conviction based on an element not charged in the indictment. The plain-error doctrine requires showing that the error resulted in a manifest miscarriage of justice and affected fundamental rights. The indictment and instruction both defined murder under the same statute, and the inclusion of "either by himself" in instruction S-1 did not alter the necessary elements for conviction. Thus, the court found no merit in this claim and affirmed the conviction and life sentence, with all appeal costs assigned to Adams County.