Jason Isham v. State of Mississippi
Mississippi Supreme Court
1ConcurrenceRandolph, Presiding Justice
¶ 44. I concur in result only, as I do not find that the trial judge misapplied the law or abused his discretion. I would hold that the trial judge acted within his discretion to refuse an untimely motion for expert funding and to refuse to grant an untimely motion for continuance. Yet we should not turn a blind eye to Isham’s claim that not having his own medical experts disadvantaged his defense. See Brandon v. State, 109 So.3d 128, 131 (Miss.Ct.App.2013). That disadvantage deprived Isham of a fair trial. Rarely, but if justice requires, this Court considers errors, whether assigned or not,…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Williams v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Wiggins v. Smith, WardenSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Ake v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- United States v. AtkinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.