Caldwell v. State
| Docket Number: | 2006-CP-00040-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 02-06-2007 Opinion Author: IRVING, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Post-conviction relief - Voluntariness of plea - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Evidentiary hearing Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C.J., LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., CHANDLER, GRIFFIS, BARNES, ISHEE, ROBERTS AND CARLTON, JJ. Procedural History: PCR; Dismissal Nature of the Case: CIVIL - POST-CONVICTION RELIEF; Dismissal |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 12-06-2005 Appealed from: MONROE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: Sharion R. Aycock Disposition: POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DISMISSED. Case Number: CV2005-100-AM |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | CHARLES CALDWELL |
CHARLES CALDWELL (PRO SE) |
||
| 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 - Voluntariness of plea - Ineffective assistance of counsel - Evidentiary hearing |
| Summary of the Facts: | Charles Caldwell pled guilty to sexual battery and was sentenced to thirty-five years, with eighteen years suspended and five years of post-release supervision. He filed a motion for post-conviction relief which was denied. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Voluntariness of plea Caldwell argues that his guilty plea was involuntarily made because he pled guilty after being persuaded by his attorney, his attorney failed to properly investigate the facts surrounding the charges, and his attorney assured him that he would get out of prison within three to four years. Caldwell was fully informed prior to entering his guilty plea that he would have to serve his sentence day for day, notwithstanding his belated allegation that his attorney informed him that he would get out of prison within three to four years. The trial judge thoroughly examined Caldwell and determined that Caldwell understood the consequences of his guilty plea and that he entered his plea knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently. There is also no merit to Caldwell’s assertion that his counsel’s failure to accept the services of a private investigator, assuming same was offered, somehow forced Caldwell to plead guilty. Issue 2: Ineffective assistance of counsel Caldwell argues that his counsel was ineffective for failing to present witnesses at Caldwell’s sentencing hearing. Caldwell had the opportunity on two separate occasions during the sentencing hearing to bring to the court’s attention that witnesses were present to testify on hisbehalf. The court inquired of Caldwell’s attorney if he or Caldwell desired to make a statement. The attorney and Caldwell each responded that he did not. Based on the submitted affidavits, even if the witnesses had been called to testify, they would not have offered any useful mitigating testimony. Issue 3: Evidentiary hearing If it plainly appears from the face of the motion, any annexed exhibits and the prior proceedings in the case that the movant is not entitled to any relief, the judge may make an order for its dismissal and cause the prisoner to be notified. There is nothing in Caldwell’s motion which requires an evidentiary hearing. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
