Club Housing v. L.R., 62 So.3d 351, 363 (Miss.2010) (“L.R. also argues, for the first time on appeal, that it would be unconstitutional for this Court to deny her those damages [on economic cost of raising a child], given that pain and suffering damages have a statutory cap. This Court declines to consider the constitutional argument, as it comes too late and is not properly before the Court.”); Williams v. Skelton, 6 So.3d 428, 430 (Miss.2009) (“This Court finds that Williams’s assertion that [the sixty-day-notice requirement in] [S]ection 15 — 1— 36(15) is unconstitutional is procedurally barred because she raises the issue for the first time on appeal, and she did not give the trial court the opportunity to rule on this issue.”); Powers v. Tiebauer, 939 So.2d 749, 754-55 (Miss.2005) (<HOLDING>); Cockrell, 865 So.2d at 360 (declining to
holding that an issue not raised in the trial court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal holding constitutional challenge to void statute may be raised for first time on appeal holding that court will not consider issue raised for first time on appeal holding that a prosecutorialmisconduct claim was procedurally barred when raised for the first time on appeal holding constitutional challenge to section 93991 raised for the first time on appeal was barred