Readus v. State
| Docket Number: | 2001-CA-01182-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 02-04-2003 Opinion Author: Chandler, J. Holding: Reversed and Remanded |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Post-conviction relief - Number of convictions reviewed - Section 99-39-9(2) - Evidentiary hearing - Voluntariness of plea - Ineffective assistance of counsel Judge(s) Concurring: McMillin, C.J., King and Southwick, P.JJ., Bridges, Thomas, Lee, Myers, and Griffis, JJ. Concurs in Result Only: Irving, J. Procedural History: PCR Nature of the Case: PCR |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 06-26-2001 Appealed from: Panola County Circuit Court Judge: Andrew C. Baker Disposition: PCR ACTION SUMMARILY DISMISSED BY TRIAL COURT District Attorney: Ann H. Lamar Case Number: CV 2001-0085-B-P1 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Antonio Readus |
JAMES D. MINOR |
||
| Appellee: | State of Mississippi | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: SCOTT STUART |
|
|
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 - Number of convictions reviewed - Section 99-39-9(2) - Evidentiary hearing - Voluntariness of plea - Ineffective assistance of counsel |
| Summary of the Facts: | Antonio Readus pled guilty to fourteen charges of burglary and attempted burglary contained in twelve indictments. He filed a motion for post-conviction relief from the fourteen charges. The court dismissed the motion, and he appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Fourteen guilty pleas Readus argues that the court erred in finding that section 99-39-9(2) required that it limit post-conviction review to only one of Readus' convictions. Section 99-39-9(2) limits post-conviction review to a single judgment, requiring a defendant to file one motion per each challenged judgment. No copy of any judgment was included in the record, so it cannot be determined if the court correctly applied the statute. On remand, the court should restrict its review to the number of convictions contained within a single judgment. Issue 2: Evidentiary hearing Readus argues that the court should have granted an evidentiary hearing on his claims of involuntariness of plea and ineffective assistance of counsel. The court may summarily dismiss a PCR motion if it plainly appears from the face of the motion, any annexed exhibits and the prior proceedings that the movant is not entitled to any relief. Readus argues that his plea was involuntary because his attorney told him that, if he pled guilty, he would be sentenced to six months and ten years on paper and that he would get RID. The transcript of the plea hearing shows that the judge thoroughly questioned Readus to ascertain voluntariness, and thoroughly advised Readus about the consequences of the plea, including the maximum sentence Readus could receive on each charge. Because Readus has attached his mother's supporting affidavit to his motion, he may avoid summary dismissal if he has alleged facts which require further inquiry in the expanded setting of an evidentiary hearing. Given that his mother's affidavit supports the conclusion that the attorney instilled an expectation of a lighter sentence, his motion was sufficient to withstand summary dismissal. With regard to his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, his affidavits allege his attorney's errors with specificity and are sufficient to show grounds for deficient performance. Therefore, his claim requires an evidentiary hearing. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
