Dupuis v. State
| Docket Number: | 2006-CA-01635-COA Linked Case(s): 2006-CA-01635-COA ; 2006-CA-01635-SCT ; 2006-CA-01635-SCT |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 11-27-2007 Opinion Author: KING, C.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Post-conviction relief - Conflict of interest - Ineffective assistance of counsel Judge(s) Concurring: LEE, P.JJ., MYERS, P.JJ., IRVING, J. CHANDLER, J. GRIFFIS, BARNES, J., ISHEE, J., ROBERTS, J., CARLTON, JJ. Procedural History: PCR Nature of the Case: CIVIL - POST-CONVICTION RELIEF |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-05-2006 Appealed from: LINCOLN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: Michael M. Taylor Disposition: MOTION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DENIED Case Number: 2005-101-LS |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | TIMOTHY DUPUIS |
DAVID RANDALL WADE |
|
|
| Appellee: | STATE OF MISSISSIPPI | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: DESHUN TERRELL MARTIN | ||
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 - Conflict of interest - Ineffective assistance of counsel |
| Summary of the Facts: | Timothy Dupuis was convicted of molestation and sentenced to fifteen years imprisonment. Dupuis filed a direct appeal, and his conviction was affirmed. Dupuis then petitioned for re-hearing which was denied, but the court issued a modified opinion. Dupuis sought leave from the Mississippi Supreme Court to proceed in the trial court on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim. The supreme court granted the application for leave to proceed and directed the trial court to conduct an evidentiary hearing regarding Dupuis’s claims. The trial court declined to grant Dupuis’s request for post-conviction relief. Dupuis appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Dupuis claimed that his attorney, Fernald, had an actual conflict of interest. Fernald was employed as the Brookhaven City Attorney and simultaneously represented Fernald in a case in which three City of Brookhaven police officers testified for the prosecution. The trial court found that Dupuis had not adequately met his burden of proving that the conflict prejudiced his defense and that there was sufficient testimony that Dupuis had waived any additional conflicts of interest. Dupuis argues that the trial judge failed to make any specific findings that his waiver of the right to conflict-free counsel was done knowingly and intelligently. There was no transcript of Dupuis’s waiver colloquy in the record. The court relied on similar testimonies of the trial judge, prosecutor, defense attorney, and the defendant in finding that Dupuis was informed of his rights and intended to waive these rights to conflict-free counsel. The court accepted Judge Smith’s testimony that he witnessed this colloquy and asked follow-up questions to ensure that Dupuis’s decision complied with the law. Thus, the circuit court did not err in holding that Dupuis adequately waived his right to conflict-free counsel. Dupuis also fails to provide evidence that, but for his attorney’s performance, the trial would have, more likely than not, ended in a different result. Therefore, the court did not err in finding that Fernald’s conduct clearly fell within the realms of trial strategy and did not amount to ineffective assistance of counsel. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
