E-Filed Document Nov 9 2023 11:00:40 2023-DR-01076-SCT Pages: 10

__________________________________________________________

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI

No. 95-DP-00066-SCT
No. 2023-DR-01076-SCT

WILLIE JEROME MANNING

Appellant/Petitioner

v.

STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
Appellee/Respondent

MOTION TO LIFT STAY OF EXECUTION, SET EXECUTION

DATE, AND DISMISS SECOND SUCCESSIVE PCR MOTION

LYNN FITCH
Attorney General of Mississippi

LaDonna C. Holland (MSB No. 101888)

Allison K. Hartman (MSB No. 105083)
Special Assistant Attorneys General
P.O. Box 220
Jackson, Mississippi 39205-0220
(601) 359-3680
LaDonna.Holland@ago.ms.gov
Allison.Hartman@ago.ms.gov
Counsel for Appellee/Respondent
 COMES NOW the State of Mississippi and moves this Court under

Mississippi Code Annotated sections 99-19-106 and 99-39-29 to lift the

stay of execution, set an execution date for the imposition of Willie

Jerome Manning’s death sentences in the above-captioned case, and

dismiss Manning’s second successive post-conviction relief motion. In

support, the State shows the following:

STATEMENT OF FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

In 1994, Manning murdered Mississippi State University students

Tiffany Miller and Jon Steckler after they left Steckler’s fraternity house

sometime after midnight. Manning v. State, 726 So. 2d 1152, 1164 (Miss.

1998). Manning shot Jon in the back of the head, and Jon’s body had

extensive abrasions that “were consistent with being run over by a car.”

Id. Manning shot Tiffany in the face at close range. Id. Tiffany “was found

with one leg out of her pants and underwear, and with her shirt pulled

up.” Id. Just days after the murders, Manning began trying to sell items

linked to Jon and items that had been stolen from Jon’s fraternity

brother’s car shortly before the murders. Id. at 1165–66. After he was

arrested, Manning confessed to inmate Earl Jordan (his cousin) “that he

had killed the students” and assured Jordan that “he was not joking.” Id.

2
at 1166. A firearms examiner later linked projectiles from the victims’

bodies to projectiles removed from trees in Manning’s yard that his

girlfriend said he shot for target practice. Id. at 1166, 1181.

An Oktibbeha County jury convicted Manning of two counts of

capital murder and returned two death sentences. Id. at 1162. This Court

affirmed the convictions and sentences after considering twenty-one

claims of alleged error. Id. at 1167–98, cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1056 (1999).

This Court denied Manning’s first motion for post-conviction relief in

2006. Manning v. State, 929 So. 2d 885 (Miss. 2006).

During Manning’s federal habeas proceedings, the district court

denied his motion to DNA test hairs found in Miller’s car, finding, in part,

that “[e]ven if DNA testing could conclusively prove that it was not

Petitioner’s hair that was found in the vehicle, those results would not

impeach the testimony given at trial, much less exonerate Petitioner.”

Order, Manning v. Epps, No. 1:05CV256-P (N.D. Miss. Oct. 3, 2008).

Similarly, the court denied Manning’s request to DNA test the victims’

fingernail scrapings and hairs found in their hands, finding that “[b]ased

on the record”, there was “no reason to suspect that Petitioner’s DNA

would be found” on those items and that the absence of his DNA on those

3
items “would not undermine confidence in the jury’s verdict.” Id. The

district court reached the merits of Manning’s claims and denied habeas

relief the next year. Manning v. Epps, 695 F. Supp. 2d 323 (N.D. Miss.

2009). The court granted a certificate of appealability on two claims, but

after Manning moved to expand the COA and the State cross-appealed

the district court’s equitable tolling ruling, the Fifth Circuit Court of

Appeals dismissed Manning’s habeas petition, finding that it was

untimely and did not meet the criteria for equitable tolling. Manning v.

Epps, 688 F.3d 177 (5th Cir. 2012), cert. denied, 568 U.S. 1251 (2013).

Three days before the Supreme Court denied certiorari review,

Manning filed a Motion for Leave to File Successive PCR Petition for

Post-Conviction Relief Including DNA Testing and Other Forensic

Analysis. Motion, Manning v. State, No. 2013-DR-00491-SCT (Miss. Mar.

22, 2013). Three days later, right after the Supreme Court denied

certiorari review, the State moved this Court to reset Manning’s

execution date. Motion, Manning v. State, No. 95-DP-00066-SCT (Mar.

25, 2013). One month later, this Court denied Manning’s successive PCR

petition and set his execution for May 7, 2013. Orders, Manning v. State,

No. 2013-DR-00491-SCT (Miss. April 25, 2013); Manning v. State, No. 95-

4
DP-00066-SCT (Miss. Apr. 25, 2013). Manning then moved the Court to

stay his execution, set aside his convictions, and grant him leave to file

another PCR petition. Motions, Manning v. State, No. 2013-DR-00491-

SCT (Miss. May 6, 2013; May 7, 2013; May 21, 2013). The Court granted

Manning’s motion to stay the execution pending further order of the

Court. Order, Manning v. State, No. 2013-DR-00491-SCT (Miss. May 7,

2013). The Court subsequently granted Manning’s second motion for

leave to file a successive PCR petition in part, allowing him to “request

… DNA testing and fingerprint comparison” in the circuit court. Order,

Manning v. State, No. 2013-DR-00491-SCT (Miss. July 25, 2013). It

denied his PCR motion “in all other respects” and denied his motion to

set aside his convictions. Ibid.

“For six years, Manning had DNA evidence tested and expert

fingerprint analysis performed.” Manning v. State, No. 2020-CA-01096-

SCT, 2022 WL 2351516, at *1 (Miss. June 30, 2022). “After receiving

allegedly inconclusive results, Manning … appeal[ed] the circuit court’s

order denying his motion to transfer the DNA evidence to a different

facility for additional DNA testing,” and this Court affirmed the trial

court’s order denying additional testing. Id. The United States Supreme

5
Court denied certiorari review last month. Manning v. Mississippi, No.

22-7615, 2023 WL 6378187 (U.S. Oct. 2, 2023). Just as he did in 2013,

Manning filed yet another successive PCR motion in this Court three

days before the United States Supreme Court denied certiorari review.

Motion, Manning v. State, No. 2023-DR-01076-SCT (Miss. Sept. 29,

2023).

ARGUMENT

Manning’s fruitless trip to the circuit court for DNA testing brought

the litigation of this case to an end. Manning’s pending motion seeking

leave to file yet another PCR petition is not an impediment to setting his

execution date. His motion is prohibited by the Mississippi Post-

Conviction Collateral Relief Act, and the Act also requires this Court to

reset an execution date when—like here—there has been a stay of

execution followed by a denial of PCR. Thus, this Court should dismiss

Manning’s second successive PCR motion and reset Manning’s execution

date.

This Court is vested with the authority to set an execution “on

motion of the state that all state and federal remedies have been

exhausted….” Miss. Code Ann. § 99-19-106. The Court “shall set an

6
execution date” for a prisoner sentenced to death “[w]hen judgment of

death becomes final and a writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme

Court has been denied.” Id. This Court implicitly found that Manning’s

judgment of death was final and that state and federal remedies were

exhausted in 2013 when it ordered Manning’s execution date to be set for

May 7, 2013. The Court only stayed Manning’s execution so that he could

pursue DNA testing and fingerprint analysis in the trial court. The

completion of that testing and the United States Supreme Court’s denial

of certiorari review necessarily means that Manning’s state and federal

remedies are exhausted once again.

Manning’s pending motion for leave to file another successive PCR

petition is not an impediment to setting his execution date because

Mississippi law prohibits untimely and successive PCR applications. See

Miss. Code Ann. §§ 99-39-5(2), 99-39-27(9). Further, Mississippi law

provides that if a stay of execution is ordered and PCR is denied, as is the

case here, “the Supreme Court of Mississippi shall forthwith fix a day,

not more than thirty (30) days distant from the date of said denial … for

the execution of the sentence[.]” Miss. Code. Ann. § 99-39-29.

7
 Manning’s pending motion is a blatant attempt to delay his lawful

execution. If a death-row inmate whose state and federal remedies have

been exhausted could create an impediment to setting an execution date

simply by filing another successive PCR motion, the State could never

carry out lawful death sentences. If the Court denies the State’s motion

and permits Manning to proceed in a third round of PCR, then nothing

would stop him—or any death-row inmate—from perpetually filing

successive PCR motions days before each time the United States

Supreme Court denies certiorari review.

As Manning has exhausted all state and federal remedies, this

Court should set an execution date consistent with Mississippi Code

Annotated section 99-19-55(1). Under that provision, the execution of a

person condemned to suffer death “shall be inflicted at 6:00 p.m. or as

soon as possible thereafter within the next twenty-four (24) hours at an

appropriate place designated by the Commissioner of the Mississippi

Department of Corrections.” Miss. Code Ann. § 99-19-55(1). This Court’s

order setting the execution date should set the timeframe in which the

execution should take place since the statutorily permitted timeframe

could encompass more than one calendar day.

8
 CONCLUSION

The State moves this Court to lift the stay of execution and reset

Manning’s execution date within thirty days as no legal impediment

exists to deter the setting of this execution date. The State also asks the

Court to dismiss or deny Manning’s motion for leave to file a second

successive PCR petition.

LYNN FITCH
Attorney General of Mississippi

By: /s/ LaDonna C. Holland

Special Assistant Attorney General
Mississippi Bar No. 101888
P.O. Box 220
Jackson, Mississippi 39205-0220
(601) 359-3827
ladonna.holland@ago.ms.gov
Counsel for Appellee/Respondent

9
 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, LaDonna C. Holland, certify that I have electronically filed this

document with the Clerk of the Court using the MEC system, which sent

notification of such filing to the following:

Krissy C. Nobile
OCPCC
239 North Lamar Street, Suite 404
Jackson, MS 39201
knobile@pcc.state.ms.us

Robert S. Mink, Sr.

5760 I-55 North, Suite 300
Jackson, MS 39211
robmink@holcombgroup.com

David P. Voisin
P.O. Box 804
Hammond, LA 70404
david@dvoisinlaw.com

THIS, the 9th day of November, 2023.

LYNN FITCH
Attorney General of Mississippi

/s/ LaDonna C. Holland

LADONNA C. HOLLAND
Special Assistant Attorney General
Counsel for Appellee/Respondent

10