Adams v. State
| Docket Number: | 2006-CP-00405-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 02-27-2007 Opinion Author: MYERS, P.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Post-conviction relief - Voluntariness of plea - Defective indictment - Ineffective assistance of counsel Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C.J., LEE, P.J., IRVING, CHANDLER, GRIFFIS, BARNES, ISHEE, ROBERTS, AND CARLTON, JJ. Procedural History: PCR Nature of the Case: CIVIL - POST-CONVICTION RELIEF |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 02-08-2006 Appealed from: RANKIN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: Samac Richardson Disposition: POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DENIED. Case Number: 2006-33 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | DEVIASSI ADAMS |
DEVIASSI ADAMS (PRO SE) |
||
| Appellee: | STATE OF MISSISSIPPI | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: W. GLENN WATTS |
|
|
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 - Defective indictment - Ineffective assistance of counsel |
| Summary of the Facts: | Deviassi Adams filed a motion for post-conviction relief which the court denied. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Voluntariness of plea Adams argues that he entered his guilty plea involuntarily and unintelligently because his attorney failed to advise him of his right against self-incrimination, right to trial, and right to cross-examine the witnesses against him. A plea is deemed voluntary and intelligent only where the defendant is advised concerning the nature of the charge against him and the consequences of the plea. The record clearly establishes that the trial judge asked of Adams several questions regarding his understanding of the nature of the charge against him, his understanding of the consequences accompanying the entering of a guilty plea, and his overall understanding of the plea process. Issue 2: Defective indictment Adams argues that the indictment (which he simultaneously alleges does not exist) contains conflicting dates, and argues that the discrepancies of the dates indicates that the indictment against him is forged. Adams pled guilty to the charges contained within the indictment he alleges not to have existed. The entry of a guilty plea constitutes an admittance of all elements of a guilty charge and operates as a waiver of all non-jurisdictional defects contained in an indictment. Issue 3: Ineffective assistance of counsel Adams argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel, asserting that his attorney failed to investigate the conflicting dates of the indictment against him, did not inform him of his constitutional rights, and failed to object to the introduction of sentencing factors. Adams provides no evidence that he suffered harm as a result of his attorney’s performance. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
