Rule 24.2 Types of Verdict

Comment Rule 24.2 specifies the type of verdicts the jury may return. Unless otherwise specified, general verdicts are required by Rule 24.2(a). The general verdict gives the jury discretion over the disposition of the case which it would not have if restricted to finding particular facts in special verdicts.

Section (b) provides for a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity or intellectual disability, which are exceptions to the general verdict rule. See Miss. Code Ann. §§ 99-13-7, 99-13-9. An insanity verdict, which should include an additional jury determination of “whether the accused has since been restored to his sanity and whether he is dangerous to the community[,]” implicates the post-acquittal procedures outlined in Mississippi Code Section 99-13-7. Miss. Code Ann. § 99-13-7(1) (Rev. 2010). See also Miss. Code Ann. § 41-21-88 (2010).

Section (c) is consistent with former Rule 3.10 of the Uniform Rules of Circuit and County Court and requires the jury to specify the particular counts and degrees of the offense(s) of which it finds the defendant guilty or not guilty. These provisions ensure that the verdict will be clear and unambiguous.

Section (d) tracks Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 31(c) and permits the jury to find the defendant guilty of any offense necessarily included in the offense charged, including an attempt to commit the offense, if such attempt is a crime. The rule places the responsibility for deciding what verdicts the jury may return on the court, restricting the jury to returning verdicts for which instructions have been given to it under Rule 24.3. Under Rule 14.1(e), the indictment gives notice to the defendant that the trial will concern all necessarily included offenses as well as the offense specified, without the need for an explicit statement to that effect. Rules 14.1(e) and 24.2(d) make clear that the prosecuting attorney, as well as the defendant, is entitled to an instruction on any offense set forth in section (d) for which there is evidentiary support and for which a verdict form is submitted to the jury.

Section (d) also substantively tracks former Rule 3.10 of the Uniform Rules of Circuit and County Court, with the exception that the current rule contains no provision for instruction on “lesser-related” offenses. Yet, pursuant to Hye v. State, 162 So. 3d 750 (Miss. 2015), “a criminal defendant no longer has the unilateral right under Mississippi law to insist upon an instruction for lesser-related offenses which are not necessarily included in the charged offense(s), i.e., so-called lesser-nonincluded-offense instructions.” Id. at 751 (overruling Griffin v. State, 533 So. 2d 444 (Miss. 1988)). Therefore, (d) is consistent with existing Mississippi case law.