John Cathcart v. Kenneth Fairly , 227 So. 3d 1176 ( 2017 )

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
NO. 2016-CA-00964-COA
JOHN CATHCART APPELLANT
v.
KENNETH FAIRLY, INDIVIDUALLY, AND IN APPELLEES
HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS JUSTICE
COURT JUDGE, AND JESSICA MASSEY,
INDIVIDUALLY, AND IN HER OFFICIAL
CAPACITY AS JUSTICE COURT CLERK
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 06/02/2016
TRIAL JUDGE: HON. STEVE S. RATCLIFF III
COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: RANKIN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: GEORGE MCDOWELL YODER III
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEES: JASON EDWARD DARE
NATURE OF THE CASE: CIVIL - OTHER
DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED: 09/19/2017
MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED:
MANDATE ISSUED:
EN BANC.
FAIR, J., FOR THE COURT:
¶1. John Cathcart, the alleged victim of a crime, seeks to collaterally attack a decision of
the Rankin County Justice Court finding no probable cause to issue misdemeanor arrest
warrants for the alleged perpetrators. The circuit court dismissed Cathcart’s petitions for a
writ of certiorari and mandamus. We find that Cathcart lacks standing to seek either remedy,
and so we affirm.
DISCUSSION
¶2. Cathcart alleges that, when he attempted to attend a neighborhood association
meeting, two individuals bullied him and physically forced him to leave. He filed affidavits
in the Rankin County Justice Court alleging that the two had committed simple assault. The
justice court held a probable cause hearing, where Cathcart testified, and the justice court
apparently found that there was no probable cause to issue arrest warrants. The disposition
on the court abstract, however, reads only “no authority per Judge Fairley.”
¶3. Cathcart was not pleased with this outcome. He proceeded to file what he styled a
“Petition for writ of certiorari, and complaint for declaratory judgment, and petition for writ
of mandamus” in the Rankin County Circuit Court. The petition presented various
allegations of defects in the probable cause hearing, allegations of misconduct and bias by
the justice court judge, and so on. It alleged that there was no final disposition of the justice
court case, and it requested that the circuit court conduct a “trial de novo” on the question of
probable cause and proceed with trying the cases as misdemeanors or binding them over to
a grand jury to consider felony charges. In the alternative, the petition alleged that Cathcart
was entitled to a writ of mandamus ordering the justice court judge and justice court clerk
to “follow their respective oaths of office in this matter” and apparently to conduct another
probable cause hearing.
¶4. The circuit court found that it “lacked jurisdiction” over the matter and dismissed the
complaint without prejudice.
¶5. On appeal, both parties present various arguments concerning jurisdiction and
procedure. But it is apparent to us that these issues are moot, as Cathcart lacks standing to
2
contest the justice court’s disposition (or not) of the prosecution. Even though misdemeanor
prosecutions may be initiated by the filing of an affidavit by a victim, it is axiomatic that the
victim is not a party to the prosecution. The Mississippi Constitution, Article 6, Section 169,
provides in relevant part that “all prosecutions shall be carried on in the name and by
authority of the ‘State of Mississippi.’” The Mississippi Code also explicitly provides that
“[a] victim . . . does not have standing to participate as a party in a criminal proceeding or
to contest the disposition of any charge.” Miss. Code Ann. § 99-36-5(3) (Rev. 2015). The
statute further provides that “[t]he rights of the victim do not include the authority to direct
the prosecution of the case.” Miss. Code Ann. § 99-43-17 (Rev. 2015). Other courts that
have considered this issue have unanimously concluded that victims lack standing to contest
the disposition of criminal cases. See Cooper v. District Court, 133 P.3d 692, 696-711
(Alaska Ct. App. 2006) (“[C]ourts from other states are unanimous in holding that a crime
victim does not have the right to participate as an independent party in a criminal case.”).
¶6. AFFIRMED.
LEE, C.J., IRVING AND GRIFFIS, P.JJ., BARNES, CARLTON, WILSON,
GREENLEE AND WESTBROOKS, JJ., CONCUR.
3