Ray v. State
| Docket Number: | 2003-CP-00170-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 06-01-2004 Opinion Author: Chandler, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Post-conviction relief - Basis for plea - Voluntariness of plea - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Exculpatory evidence Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Bridges and Southwick, P.JJ., Thomas, Lee, Irving, Myers and Griffis, JJ. Procedural History: PCR Nature of the Case: PCR |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 12-20-2002 Appealed from: Panola County Circuit Court Judge: Ann H. Lamar Disposition: POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DISMISSED District Attorney: John W. Champion Case Number: CV2002-0167LP2 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Richard C. Ray |
PRO SE |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | THE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: JOHN R. HENRY |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Post-conviction relief - Basis for plea - Voluntariness of plea - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Exculpatory evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Richard Ray pled guilty to armed robbery and was sentenced to thirty years, with fourteen to serve and sixteen to be suspended. Richard filed a motion for post-conviction relief which was denied. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Basis for plea A defendant’s guilty plea is sufficient if it is a voluntary and knowledgeable plea with an independent evidentiary suggestion of guilt. The record does not suggest that Richard was offered any hope of reward for entering his plea of guilty, or that he was coerced, threatened or intimidated into making it. Although Richard denied that he possessed a handgun during the robbery only after it became apparent that a thirty-year sentence would be imposed upon him, he admitted that he intended to put the store clerk in fear by allegedly exhibiting a piece of aluminum and that he intended to rob the store when he entered it. Therefore, it was not necessary that Richard admit to specifically possessing a handgun during the robbery because the State had already established an abundance of independent evidence of guilt to support the plea bargain. Richard’s guilty plea is valid notwithstanding his denial of the possession of a handgun. Issue 2: Voluntariness of plea A plea is considered voluntary if the defendant is advised about the nature of the charge against him and the consequences of the entry of the plea. The transcript from Richard’s plea hearing clearly shows that he was informed of his constitutional rights and those he was waiving by pleading guilty and that he was told the maximum sentences that he could receive for the crimes with which he was charged. Issue 3: Ineffective assistance of counsel Richard argues that he did not receive effective assistance of counsel, because his lawyer forced him to enter a plea of guilty to armed robbery and did not inform him of what exactly constitutes a deadly weapon under the law. Because there is no indication in the record other than the allegations made by Richard in his brief that his attorney’s performance was ineffective, he has failed to meet his statutory burden of proof required to establish a prima facie showing. Issue 4: Exculpatory evidence Richard argues that the State failed to disclose exculpatory information contained in his first confession given to the police following his arrest and that law enforcement exhibited bias and prejudice towards him. His claims are either waived by his valid guilty plea or contradicted by the record. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
