Trice v. State
| Docket Number: | 2007-CP-00041-COA Linked Case(s): 2007-CP-00041-COA ; 2007-CT-00041-SCT |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 12-11-2007 Opinion Author: LEE, P.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Post-conviction relief - Evidentiary hearing - Voluntariness of plea - Right to speedy trial - Fraudulent indictment - Exculpatory evidence - Ineffective assistance of counsel Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C.J., MYERS, 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: 12-15-2006 Appealed from: LEE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: Thomas J. Gardner Disposition: POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DENIED Case Number: CV06-217(G)L |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | MICHAEL TRICE |
MICHAEL TRICE (PRO SE) |
|
|
| Appellee: | STATE OF MISSISSIPPI | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: JOHN R. HENRY | ||
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 - Evidentiary hearing - Voluntariness of plea - Right to speedy trial - Fraudulent indictment - Exculpatory evidence - Ineffective assistance of counsel |
| Summary of the Facts: | Michael Trice pled guilty to the sale of cocaine. He was sentenced to twenty years with fifteen years suspended. He filed a motion for post-conviction relief which was denied. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Evidentiary hearing Trice argues that the court erred in dismissing his motion for post-conviction relief without ordering an evidentiary hearing. In order to warrant an evidentiary hearing, Trice must allege facts which require further inquiry in the expanded setting of an evidentiary hearing. Trice alleges no facts which would warrant an evidentiary hearing. Issue 2: Voluntariness of plea Trice argues that his plea of guilty was prompted by threats and promises of leniency by certain law enforcement personnel. However, Trice’s sworn statements in both his petition to enter a guilty plea and during the plea hearing indicate that his plea was not coerced. It is well settled that solemn declarations in court carry a strong presumption of verity. Issue 3: Right to speedy trial Trice argues that his right to a speedy trial was violated. This issue is without merit since Trice waived his right to a trial when he pled guilty to the sale of cocaine. Issue 4: Fraudulent indictment Trice argues that the indictment against him was fraudulent because it was forged. However, no evidence appears in the record that the indictment was forged. He also argues that the indictment was defective because it did not state the statute under which he was charged. This argument fails since it is not necessary for an indictment to state a specific statute under which a defendant is charged. Issue 5: Exculpatory evidence Trice argues that his attorney failed to disclose certain exculpatory evidence. Trice refers to a videotape of the sale of the cocaine. It appears from the record that Trice viewed the videotape. Thus, it does not appear that the State failed to disclose exculpatory evidence. Issue 6: Ineffective assistance of counsel Trice argues that his attorney failed to read materials given in discovery and that the evidence admitted against him was insufficient to support a guilty verdict. Trice stated during the plea colloquy that he was satisfied with his attorney’s performance. No indication appears in the record that Trice’s attorney inaccurately advised him concerning his sentence. Further, Trice waived his right to trial when he pled guilty and cannot now assert that there was insufficient evidence to support a guilty verdict. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
