Smith v. State
| Docket Number: | 2002-CP-01111-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 05-13-2003 Opinion Author: Lee, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Post-conviction relief - Voluntariness of plea - URCCC 8.04(3) - Illegal search - Sufficiency of evidence Judge(s) Concurring: McMillin, C.J., King and Southwick, P.JJ., Bridges, Thomas, Irving, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ. Procedural History: PCR Nature of the Case: PCR |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 05-13-2002 Appealed from: Leake County Circuit Court Judge: Marcus D. Gordon Disposition: PETITION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DISMISSED District Attorney: Ken Turner Case Number: 00-CR-002-LE |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Christopher L. Smith a/k/a Christopher Smith |
PRO SE |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: JEFFREY A. KLINGFUSS |
|
|
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 - Voluntariness of plea - URCCC 8.04(3) - Illegal search - Sufficiency of evidence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Christopher Smith was convicted of possession of cocaine and was sentenced to twelve years. He filed a motion for post-conviction relief which was dismissed. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Voluntariness of plea Smith argues that he did not voluntarily and intelligently enter his guilty plea due to the ineffectiveness of his counsel. Rule 8.04(3) of the Uniform Rules of Circuit and County Court Practice requires the court to address the defendant personally and to inquire and determine that he is competent to understand the nature of the charge; that he understands the nature and consequences of the plea, including the maximum and minimum penalties provided by law; and that he understands that by pleading guilty he waives his constitutional rights of trial by jury, the right to confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses, and the right against self-incrimination. At Smith’s plea hearing, the judge thoroughly questioned Smith in compliance with Rule 8.04(4), and Smith affirmed that he was pleased with his attorney's representation of his case. Issue 2: Illegal search Smith argues that the police officer's search of his pants pocket violated his Fourth Amendment right against illegal search and seizure. Smith is barred from raising this issue on appeal, since his guilty plea acted to waive his right to challenge this issue. Issue 3: Sufficiency of evidence Smith argues that the evidence was insufficient to convict him. Since Smith pled guilty, he waived his opportunity for a jury to review the sufficiency of evidence. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
