London Williams, Jr. v. State of Mississippi
Cases that cite this one
4 later published cases cite this decision.
- Roderick O. Turner v. Pelicia Hall (Miss. Ct. App. 2018)
- 1st Step Sober Living LLC and Scott Smith v. Bill Cleveland, Sherri McClain, Terry Garrett, Dori Garrett, Lunsford Warner, Richard Burkhalter, John C. Bell, Tim Overton, Shannon Overton, Justin Chandler, Jeni Chandler, Scott Castillo, Karen Castillo, Doug Mansell, Heather Mansell, Lee Blanton, Kelly Blanton, Dallas Allgood, Holly Allgood, Rhett Puckett, Leigh Ann Puckett, Brett Brooks, Carla Brooks, Josh Dufford, Kelli Dufford, Troy Neuhaus, Robin Neuhaus, Scott Neuhaus, Ann Neuhaus, Phil Hopper, Johnnie Hopper, Cathy Sanders, William McCaulley, Julie McCaulley, Jim Ingram, Heather Ingram, Lucas Smith, Kama Smith, Larry Roberts, Kathy Lott, Kevin Lott, Larry Benton, Barbara Benton, Alicia Hinton, Joyce Ann Tubb, Patti O'Neill, John Bell, William Hodge, Paula Hodge, Cathy Sanders, Esther Dunlap, Benjamin Riley, Ryan French and Jaquel French, Monachia French, Freddie Samuels, Mary Samuels, Thomas E. Gilmer, Sondra Gilmer, Michelle Turberville, Larry Walker, Cherie Walker, Walter C. Partlow, Ruthlyn Partlow, Wayne Francis, Katherine Riley, Joy Asters, David R. Fowler, Cynthia Fowler, Evangeline Jabil, Troy Duncan, Julie Duncan, Parrish Alford, Laurie Alford, Travis Gallaher, Connie Gallaher, Austin Brooks, Emily Brooks, Julie M. Wright, John L. Armour, Jr., Richard McCharen, Lynn McCharen, Sally Shaull, Keith J. Gardner, Wes Asters, Cliff Hobby, Dana Hobby, Shellie Fitzpatrick, Antonio Cook, Ashley Cook, Mohamed Alrazski, Leigh Moser, Nick Demoran, Cherie Demoran, Daniel G. Smith, Dale W. Smith, Cynthia R. Roberts, Ben Scott, Elizabeth Scott, Amanda Golding, Steve Golding, Montine Posey, Ron Blackwell, Francis Blackwell, Ruth Hollingsworth and City of Tupelo, Mississippi (Miss. Ct. App. 2025)
- Cornelius Belmer v. State of Mississippi (Miss. Ct. App. 2022)
- State of Mississippi v. Brian Runnels (Miss. Ct. App. 2019)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
FOR THE COURT:
¶ 1. London Williams asks us to revisit the questibn whether incest is a “sex crime.” However, •'Williams’s case is now moot because he'was released on post-release supervision during the pendency of this appeal. Therefore, his appeal must be dismissed. ■
,¶2. Williams was convicted of incest, Miss. Code Ann. § 97-29-5 (Rev. 2014), for engaging in sexual activity with his daughter, who was twenty years old at the time. He was acquitted of sexual battery. The facts of the case are discussed in Williams v. State, 89 So.3d 676 (Miss. Ct. App. 2012). The circuit court ultimately sentenced Williams to serve ten years in the custody of the Mississippi Department of Corrections (MDOC), with four years suspended and four years of post-release supervision.
¶ 3.,With one narrow exception not applicable in this case, no inmate “convicted of a sex crime” is eligible for parole or earned time. See Miss. Code Ann. §§ 47-5-139(1)(d) & 47-7-3(1)(b) (Rev. 2015). MDOC considers incest a sex crime, so it classified Williams as ineligible for parole and earned time. Williams disagrees with his classification. He argues that although incest'is a crime that involves sex, it is not a- “sex- crime.” 1 Williams pursued this issue through MDOC’s administrative remedy program. However, MDOC denied relief, citing this Court’s decision in Cochran v. State, 969 So.2d 119, 122 (¶ 10) (Miss. Ct. App. 2007), which held that incest is a sex crime. Williams appealed MDOC’s decision to the Sunflower County Circuit Court, but the circuit court affirmed, also citing Cochran. Williams again appealed, and'his appeal was assigned to this Court.
¶ 4. While his appeal was pending in this Court, Williams was released on post-release supervision^ MDOC suggests that Williams’s release renders the case moot. We agree. Now that Williams has been released, he is unable to show that a ruling in his favor would be of any practical benefit to him. Therefore, we dismiss his appeal as moot. See Fails v. Jefferson Davis Cty. Pub. Sch. Bd., 95 So.3d, 1223, 1225-26 (¶¶ 10-14) (Miss. 2012); Hunt v. MDOC, 217 So.3d 789, 791 (¶ 6) (Miss. Ct. App. 2017).
¶ 5. APPEAL DISMISSED.
. Williams emphasizes that incest is not listed as a "sex offense" in the definitions section of the chapter on sex offender registration, see Miss. Code Ann. § 45-33-23(h)(Rev. 2015), and the Department of Public Safety apparently has confirmed that he is not required to register as a sex offender, However, by its terms, that definition of "sex offense” is controlling only "[f]or putposes of" the sex offender registration.laws. Id. § 45-33-23.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.