ALANDO VAUGHN LANDO APPELLANT v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE (2025)

¶1. A man was convicted of multiple counts of drive-by shooting and shooting into a motor vehicle. His appellate counsel asserts there are no viable issues warranting review. After a thorough and independent review of the record, we affirm.

BACKGROUND

¶2. On the evening of September 3, 2022, Kris ¹ called the police to report a shooting involving his car on Prichard Road in Tunica County. Kris and a few friends were “riding around in [his] car” when things took a turn. The group stopped and parked outside Claire's grandmother's house “to get some Wi-Fi” when they noticed Alando Vaughn and Denise Short drive past Kris's car “slowly,” seemingly “trying to see who was in the car.” Vaughn and Short drove away, but then “they came back around a second time.” This time Vaughn was “pointing a gun” toward Kris's car.

¶3. Claire and Kris “hopped out [of] the car,” and Claire ran into her grandmother's house “once they pointed the gun at the car.” Kris “was heated” and asked Vaughn, “Why the f*** [are] you pointing a gun at my car?” But Kris would later testify that Vaughn never responded to his question; instead, “[h]e just started shooting.”

¶4. In February 2023, Alando Vaughn was indicted in Tunica County on four counts of drive-by shooting and one count of shooting into a motor vehicle with a firearm enhancement.²

¶5. Multiple witnesses were called to testify on behalf of the State, including three law enforcement officers, three of the minors involved in the incident, and the parents of two of the minors. Demario Coleman of the Tunica County Sheriff's Department testified that he received a call in reference “to shots being fired on Prichard Road” but was dispatched to a house on Cotton Street—Kris's house. Once Deputy Coleman arrived, he explained to the jury how he “noticed an aluminum color Chevy Cobalt with the rear back window shattered.” After speaking with Kris and his mother, the deputy determined “that the vehicle had been shot at.”

¶6. Donald Davern, an investigator at the Tunica County Sheriff's Department, also testified that he was dispatched as a result of a “shots-fired call.” Before visiting the crime scene, Investigator Davern briefly stopped at Kris's house, where he, too, “observed that the rear window” of the Chevy Cobalt “had been shattered” and that “glass was inside the vehicle.” He further disclosed he noticed that “to the left side of the tag and off to the right side of the tag, were two bullet holes in the bumper area of the vehicle.”

¶7. After leaving Kris's house, the investigator testified that he “went over to the intersection of Prichard Road and Edwards[.]” And it was in that intersection “where the shell casings were located.” Investigator Davern revealed to the jury that he “retrieved three shell casings” in total. Pictures of the shell casings—as well as the actual shell casings—were admitted into evidence and published for the jury to see.

¶8. Kim Pettis, a mother of one of the minor children involved, also testified. She explained to the jury that she “grew up with [Vaughn]” and had known him “all [her] life.” She recounted how Vaughn approached her while she was working a few weeks after the incident and apologized to her. When asked what he said, Ms. Pettis responded, “He just saw me and said he was sorry, that he didn't know my daughter was in the car.”

¶9. The jury found Vaughn guilty of all five counts: four counts of drive-by shooting and one count of shooting into a motor vehicle with a firearm enhancement. For each count of drive-by shooting, he was sentenced to 15 years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections, with 10 years to serve and 5 years suspended. For shooting into a motor vehicle, he was sentenced to a 5-year suspended sentence, but as a result of the firearm enhancement he was sentenced to serve an additional 5 years in custody. All sentences were set to run concurrently with one another. Vaughn moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a new trial, which the trial court denied.

¶10. Vaughn appealed. His appellate counsel filed a brief and certified no arguable issues exist for purposes of appellate review.

DISCUSSION

¶11. The Mississippi “Supreme Court has established a procedure to govern cases where appellate counsel represents an indigent criminal defendant and does not believe his or her client's case presents any arguable issues on appeal.” Nobles v. State, 391 So. 3d 243, 245 (¶8) (Miss. Ct. App. 2024) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Dyer v. State, 338 So. 3d 129, 131 (¶12) (Miss. Ct. App. 2022)). Counsel must file a brief in compliance with Mississippi Rule of Appellate Procedure 28(a) as well as

certify that there are no arguable issues supporting the client's appeal, and he or she has reached this conclusion after scouring the record thoroughly, specifically examining: (a) the reason for the arrest and the circumstances surrounding arrest; (b) any possible violations of the client's right to counsel; (c) the entire trial transcript; (d) all rulings of the trial court; (e) possible prosecutorial misconduct; (f) all jury instructions; (g) all exhibits, whether admitted into evidence or not; and (h) possible misapplication of the law in sentencing.

Lindsey v. State, 939 So. 2d 743, 748 (¶18) (Miss. 2005). “Counsel must then send a copy of the appellate brief to the defendant, inform the client that counsel could find no arguable issues in the record, and advise the client of his or her right to file a pro se brief.” Id. “After receiving a Lindsey brief, this Court will review the record and any pro se brief filed by the defendant to determine whether any arguable issue exists.” McClain v. State, 393 So. 3d 1007, 1009 (¶10) (Miss. 2024) (citing Lindsey, 939 So. 2d at 748 (¶18)).

¶12. Upon careful review of the record, we find that Vaughn's counsel complied with the established procedures set out in Lindsey. In his brief, appointed counsel certified that he “diligently searched the procedural and factual history” of this case and searched the record “for any arguable issues which could be presented to the Court ․ in good faith for appellate review” but “found none.” Counsel confirmed that a copy of the brief was sent to Vaughn informing him of such and that he “has the right to file a pro se brief” should he choose to do so. Keeping in line with his right, this Court also entered an order giving Vaughn “forty days to file a pro se brief raising any issues he desires to be considered on appeal.” See Order, Vaughn v. State, No. 2024-KA-00012-COA (Miss. Ct. App. July 18, 2024). Vaughn did not file a pro se supplemental brief.

¶13. After independently reviewing the record, this Court finds no arguable issues that would require supplemental briefing. Therefore, the trial court's judgment is affirmed.

CONCLUSION

¶14. Because we find that the procedural requirements of Lindsey were satisfied, and our review of the record revealed no arguable issues for appeal, Vaughn's convictions and sentences are affirmed.

¶15. AFFIRMED.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Because this case involves multiple minors, we use pseudonyms for all minors to shield their identities.

2.   Vaughn was indicted with Denise Short. Short separately appealed her conviction; however, it was dismissed after she passed away while incarcerated. Order, Short v. State, No. 2023-KA-01390-COA (Miss. Ct. App. July 2, 2024).

McCARTY, J., FOR THE COURT:

BARNES, C.J., CARLTON AND WILSON, P.JJ., WESTBROOKS, McDONALD, LAWRENCE, EMFINGER, WEDDLE AND ST. PÉ, JJ., CONCUR.