Ronald Shinstock v. State of Mississippi
Mississippi Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
MAXWELL, JUSTICE,
FOR THE COURT:
¶ 1. Ronald Shinstock appeals his sale-of-methamphetamine conviction. He argues the trial court should have excluded some of the State’s evidence based on an alleged Fourth Amendment violation. But Shinstock concedes he never asserted a Fourth Amendment claim in the trial court. So he forfeited this issue. And the record does not support a, finding of plain error. The record also does not sufficiently support Shinstock’s only other appellate claim — ineffective assistance of counsel. So we decline to address this issue on direct appeal.
¶ 2. We therefore affirm…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- United States v. OlanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Payton v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Kimmelman v. MorrisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Welsh v. WisconsinSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Murray v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Damion LaFredrick Pace v. State of MississippiMississippi Supreme Court · 2018
- Adrian Montgomery v. State of MississippiMississippi Supreme Court · 2018
- Amondo Stewart a/k/a Amondo DeCharles Stewart v. State of MississippiMississippi Supreme Court · 2023
- Antonio Sauceda Reyes a/k/a Antonio Reyes v. State of MississippiMississippi Supreme Court · 2025
- Cayce William Jones v. State of MississippiMississippi Supreme Court · 2025
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.