Peacock v. State


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2006-CP-00804-COA
Linked Case(s): 2006-CP-00804-COA

Court of Appeals: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 03-27-2007
Opinion Author: ISHEE, J.
Holding: Affirmed

Additional Case Information: Topic: Post-conviction relief - Illegal sentence - Revocation of sentence - Notice of revocation proceedings
Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C.J., LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., IRVING, CHANDLER, GRIFFIS, BARNES, ROBERTS AND CARLTON, JJ.
Procedural History: PCR; Dismissal
Nature of the Case: CIVIL - POST-CONVICTION RELIEF

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 03-20-2006
Appealed from: YALOBUSHA COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
Judge: Andrew C. Baker
Disposition: POST-CONVICTION RELIEF IS DENIED AND DISMISSED.
Case Number: CV2005-0107BY2

  Party Name: Attorney Name:  
Appellant: JAMES A. PEACOCK A/K/A JIMMY PEACOCK




JAMES A. PEACOCK (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 - Illegal sentence - Revocation of sentence - Notice of revocation proceedings

Summary of the Facts: James Peacock pled guilty to burglary of a building other than a dwelling, grand larceny, simple assault of a law enforcement officer and four counts of sale of a controlled substance. He was sentenced to twenty years confinement with seven to serve and thirteen years suspended. After he was released, the court revoked the suspended sentence. A trial was held and Peacock was acquitted of the charges that led to his new indictment. Peacock appeals.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: Issue 1: Illegal sentence Peacock argues that his sentence was illegally imposed, because he received a suspended sentence, and as a previously convicted felon, he could only have received parole or post-release supervision. The law is clear that a person may not complain that he received a lighter sentence than that imposed to invalidate a sentence. Issue 2: Revocation of sentence Peacock contends his sentence was illegally revoked because he was ultimately found not guilty of the charges upon which his suspended sentence was revoked. A conviction is not necessary for revocation of probation. Peacock fails to specify that he did not violate the terms and conditions of his suspended sentence. Issue 3: Notice Peacock argues that the notice of the revocation proceedings that he received was insufficient to comport with due process. The circuit court found, and Peacock does not deny, that he received actual notice of the revocation proceedings. Nothing in the record indicates that Peacock’s due process rights were infringed.


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