Justice for Carly Gregg is an independent advocacy website dedicated to examining Carly’s case, the evidence presented at trial and the legal questions surrounding her conviction and sentence.
We recognise the seriousness of the events and the devastating loss of life. We also believe that understanding this case requires looking beyond headlines and CCTV footage to consider the psychiatric testimony, court proceedings and arguments presented by both sides.
This website brings together Carly’s story, legal documents, case updates and information about the continuing campaign.
Carly Gregg's Legal Case: Latest Developments
On 20 August 2026, the Mississippi Supreme Court upheld Carly Gregg's convictions and sentences.
Carly's legal team subsequently sought rehearing, asking the Court to reconsider issues raised in the appeal.
This section provides access to the relevant legal documents so visitors can examine the arguments, the Court's reasoning and subsequent developments for themselves.
We encourage readers to explore the evidence and understand the different legal perspectives surrounding this case.
Motion for a Rehearing
TWO MAJOR ARGUMENTS
1. The Court should reconsider the convictions because multiple trial errors worked together, particularly around Carly’s insanity defence.
2. At the very least, the Court must enforce its own ruling that Carly cannot be sentenced to LWOP and is parole eligible.
THE NUMBERS
The motion argues that the applicable calculation appears to produce: 20 YEARS for a life sentence.
They ask the Court to expressly identify the calculation rather than leave it to MDOC.
THE FACTS
The Supreme Court affirmed Carly’s sentences without expressly ordering MDOC to change her classification.
MDOC’s Deputy General Counsel confirmed in writing that MDOC’s Records Department had Carly classified as “life without parole.”
The motion asks the Court to state unequivocally that:
- Count I – life imprisonment – is parole eligible.
- Count II – life imprisonment – is also parole eligible.
- Neither sentence can be classified or administered as LWOP.
- The Rankin County Circuit Court should issue an amended sentencing order.
- MDOC should reclassify her and calculate her parole-eligibility date.
THE HIERARCHY OF REMEDIES
The motion gives the Court a clear order of requests:
1. Vacate the convictions and send the case back for a new trial, based on cumulative error.
2. Vacate both sentences and order a new sentencing proceeding with proper jury instructions.
3. IF A PROPERLY INSTRUCTED JURY DOES NOT IMPOSE PAROLE-ELIGIBLE LIFE ON COUNT I
The court would impose 20–40 years under the statute.
4. Make clear that Miller does not authorise or validate LWOP where Mississippi law does not permit it.
5. Even if the Court refuses a new trial and refuses a new sentencing hearing, it should expressly declare both of Carly's sentences parole eligible, order the circuit court to amend the sentencing order, and order MDOC to reclassify and calculate her eligibility date.
CARLY GREGG — A SECOND CHANCE • A BRIGHTER TOMORROW
“I’v had several people reach out to me since the Mississippi Supreme Court’s opinion in the Carly Madison Gregg case was handed down yesterday, telling me how much they hated the result for us. I really do appreciate that—especially from people who know how hard we worked on this case and how much heart, soul, and emotion we poured into it.
I am disappointed that we did not get a new trial because I FIRMLY believe Carly did not get a fair shake the first time around. But yesterday’s opinion was not a complete loss, and the fight is not over.
Importantly, the Supreme Court made clear that Carly was sentenced to life imprisonment—not life without the possibility of parole—and that she is potentially eligible for parole. That is a SIGNIFICANT clarification, particularly given the State’s position throughout this case regarding the meaning of her sentence. Prior to this opinion, the State, the trial court, and, most significantly, the Department of Corrections operated under the assumption that Carly was not eligible for parole and would consequently die in prison.
The Court also specifically recognized that Carly’s ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims are the type of claims that are better addressed through post-conviction relief, where evidence outside the trial record can be presented.
So, while yesterday was certainly not the result we wanted, it is not the end of this case. And it was not a complete loss.
We’re going to keep fighting.
I also want to thank everyone who helped with this appeal, including my co-counsel, Lance Mixon; my assistant, Walter Cardin; and, most of all, Bob and Vicki Breland for the trust and support they placed in us.”
JAMES MURPHY
ATTORNEY FOR CARLY GREGG
