Deionta Ivory v. State of Mississippi

Summary

The Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed Deionta Ivory’s convictions and sentences for armed robbery and kidnapping. The court held that counsel’s oral motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict could not be construed as a motion for a new trial, so the challenge to the overwhelming weight of the evidence was not preserved. The court nevertheless considered the ineffective-assistance claim, finding deficient performance but no prejudice because the convictions were supported by the overwhelming weight of the evidence.

Holdings

1. An ore tenus motion for JNOV cannot be recharacterized as a motion for a new trial when counsel expressly moved for JNOV, the trial court ruled on that motion, and no proper written motion for a new trial was filed.
2. Ivory did not preserve his challenge that the verdicts were contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence because he failed to file a cognizable motion for a new trial.
3. Counsel's failure to file a post-trial motion for a new trial constituted deficient performance, but Ivory did not establish prejudice.
4. The verdicts were not contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence, and no reasonable probability existed that the trial court would have granted a motion for a new trial.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Ivory's ore tenus motion for JNOV could be construed as a motion for a new trial challenging the overwhelming weight of the evidence.
2. Whether the weight-of-the-evidence challenge was preserved for appellate review.
3. Whether trial counsel's failure to file a motion for a new trial constituted ineffective assistance of counsel.
4. Whether Ivory was prejudiced by counsel's failure to file a motion for a new trial because the verdicts were contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence.

Disposition

affirmed