Hentz v. State


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2001-CP-01265-COA
Linked Case(s): 2001-CP-01265-COA ; 2001-CT-01265-SCT ; 2001-CT-01265-SCT ; 2001-CT-01265-SCT

Court of Appeals: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 02-25-2003
Opinion Author: King, P.J.
Holding: Affirmed

Additional Case Information: Topic: Post-conviction relief - Voluntariness of plea - Unlawful search - Defective indictment - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Evidentiary hearing
Judge(s) Concurring: McMillin, C.J., Bridges, Thomas, Lee, Irving, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ.
Concurs in Result Only: Southwick, P.J.
Procedural History: PCR
Nature of the Case: PCR

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 07-27-2001
Appealed from: Panola County Circuit Court
Judge: George C. Carlson, Jr.
Disposition: POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DENIED
District Attorney: John W. Champion
Case Number: 2000-0272-C-P2

  Party Name: Attorney Name:  
Appellant: Roger L. Hentz




PRO SE



 

Appellee: State of Mississippi OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: CHARLES W. MARIS  

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 - Unlawful search - Defective indictment - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Evidentiary hearing

Summary of the Facts: Roger Hentz pled guilty to a charge of conspiracy to manufacture a controlled substance, a charge of manufacturing methamphetamine, and a charge of possession of drug paraphernalia. He was sentenced, as an habitual offender, to ten years on the conspiracy charge, ten years on the manufacturing charge, and six months on the paraphernalia possession charge. He filed a petition for post-conviction relief which was dismissed. Hentz appeals.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: Issue 1: Voluntariness of pleas Hentz argues that his guilty pleas were involuntarily and unintelligently made because of coercion and threats made by his appointed counsel, D.A.'s office and law enforcement. A plea of guilty is not voluntary if induced by fear, violence, deception, or improper inducements. Although Hentz suddenly claimed to have misunderstood the plea and potential sentence when he found out what his sentence would be, the record supports the finding that no promises were made to Hentz. His attorney stated Hentz was told that it was an "open plea," and Hentz subsequently indicated that he had not misunderstood the plea, but had rather hoped that he would get a six year sentence or at most eight years. A troubling aspect of this case is that Hentz’s attorney asked the sheriff to talk to Hentz about a potential plea. The sheriff is by definition a part of the prosecution team and such a procedure was highly questionable. Given that Hentz's testimony established this as a non-prejudicial conversation, however, it is harmless in this case. Issue 2: Unlawful search Hentz argues that he was unlawfully stopped and searched on his private property and that information from his medical records was unlawfully obtained. Because a valid guilty plea operates as a waiver of all non-jurisdictional rights or defects which are incident to trial, Hentz’s guilty plea acted as a waiver of these rights. Issue 3: Defective indictment Hentz argues that the sentence enhancement portion of the indictment is defective because it is included as a separate count, rather than being included in the actual charging language and appearing prior to the phrase "against the peace and dignity of the State of Mississippi." Not only did Hentz waive the issue by failing to raise the issue before entering his pleas, but the State incorporated the enhancement language into each of the three actual charging sections properly concluded the indictment with the language "against the peace and dignity of the State of Mississippi." Issue 4: Ineffective assistance of counsel Hentz argues that he was denied effective assistance of counsel, because his attorney failed to conduct an independent pretrial investigation, failed to file motions to suppress the unlawfully seized evidence, conspired with assistant district attorney to have his bond revoked if he continued to pressure his attorney to investigate the case, failed to prepare for the eventually filed suppression motions by subpoenaing critical witnesses, failed to file certain motions to dismiss his defective indictment, threatened him with fifty and one-half years if he did not agree to plead guilty, refused to withdraw so Hentz could hire another attorney, and misinformed him regarding the sentence. To prove his claim, he must show his attorney’s conduct was deficient and prejudicial. Hentz indicated that he was satisfied with his attorney and that he had no complaints against him. Therefore, he has failed to meet his burden of establishing by convincing evidence its factual failing. Issue 5: Evidentiary hearing Hentz argues that the court erred when it failed to consider the merits of his supplemental legal brief and failed to grant an evidentiary hearing. An evidentiary hearing is not required if, after thorough review of the record, the court is convinced that the petition for post-conviction relief is lacking in merit. Here, the judge properly found that Hentz's post-conviction relief request was without merit and therefore, no evidentiary hearing was required.


Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court