Gunter v. State
| Docket Number: | 2002-CP-00133-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 04-01-2003 Opinion Author: Bridges, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Post-conviction relief - Voluntariness of plea - Evidentiary basis - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Excessive sentence - Right to appeal Judge(s) Concurring: McMillin, C.J., King and Southwick, P.JJ., Thomas, Lee, Irving, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ. Procedural History: PCR Nature of the Case: PCR |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 11-30-2001 Appealed from: Lowndes County Circuit Court Judge: Lee J. Howard Disposition: POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DISMISSED. Case Number: 2001-0156-CVl |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Randy Gunter |
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 - Evidentiary basis - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Excessive sentence - Right to appeal |
| Summary of the Facts: | Randy Gunter pled guilty to cocaine possession. He was sentenced to eight years, suspended, with one year house arrest, followed by five years' supervised probation. When he tested positive for cocaine, his probation was revoked and he was transferred to Parchman to serve his full sentence of eight years. Gunter filed a motion to vacate conviction and/or correct sentence as a motion for post-conviction which the court denied. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Voluntariness of plea Gunter argues that he was frightened into pleading because of his age and first time offender status. A plea is voluntary where the defendant was advised of the nature of the charges against him, the rights which he would be waiving by pleading guilty, the maximum sentences that he could receive for the crimes with which he was charged and whether he was satisfied with the advice and counsel of his attorney. The record shows that Gunter indicated that he understood that his guilty plea would serve as a waiver to all of the constitutional rights that the judge had mentioned and that he was not being coerced and was not under the influence of any form of impairing drug. Issue 2: Evidentiary basis Gunter argues that the prosecution never introduced proof that the amount of cocaine was in excess of 2.64 grams. A guilty plea operates to waive the defendant's privilege against self-incrimination, the right to confront and cross-examine the prosecution's witnesses, the right to a jury trial and the right that the prosecution prove each element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, the State was not required to introduce the cocaine. Issue 3: Ineffective assistance of counsel Gunter argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel since defense counsel failed to perform an independent investigation of the evidence which the State alleged to have had against Gunter. To prove his claim, he must show his attorney’s conduct was deficient and prejudicial. There is nothing in the record to indicate that Gunter's attorney did anything more than be available to his client and advise him on the ramifications of pleading guilty versus pleading not guilty and taking his chances at trial. Issue 4: Excessive sentence Gunter argues that his sentence was excessive. A sentence is proper if it is within the limits fixed by statute. The judge explained that he was required by law to sentence a defendant charged with possession of cocaine to not less than four years and no more than sixteen years and could impose a fine up to two hundred and fifty thousand dollars. Gunter received only a sentence of eight years, suspended, one year of the Intensive Supervision Program and five years of probation. This was well within statutory limits. Issue 5: Right to appeal Gunter argues that the court erred in advising him that he had no right to appeal his sentence. The court correctly informed Gunter that he could not appeal a plea of guilty to the supreme court and that petitioner's options in having a guilty plea reviewed involve filing a motion for post-conviction relief. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
