Hull v. State
| Docket Number: | 2007-CP-00186-COA Linked Case(s): 2007-CP-00186-COA |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 12-11-2007 Opinion Author: Roberts, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Post-conviction relief - Time bar - Revocation sentence Judge(s) Concurring: LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., IRVING, CHANDLER, GRIFFIS, BARNES, ISHEE AND CARLTON, JJ. Concurs in Result Only: KING, C.J. Procedural History: PCR Nature of the Case: CIVIL - POST-CONVICTION RELIEF |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 01-16-2007 Appealed from: WARREN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: Frank G. Vollor Disposition: POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DENIED. Case Number: 07,0006CIV |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | LORENZO HULL |
LORENZO HULL (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 - Time bar - Revocation sentence |
| Summary of the Facts: | Lorenzo Hull pled guilty to possession of cocaine and was sentenced to an eight-year suspended sentence with five years of post-release supervision. When Hull violated the terms of his post-release supervision, his eight-year sentence was reinstated with credit for time already served. Hull file a motion for post-conviction relief which was denied. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | All but one of Hull’s issues is barred by the three-year statute of limitations. Hull pleaded guilty on August 13, 2002, and the motion for post-conviction relief was filed on December 14, 2006. As such, only the issue of whether the revocation sentence exceeds the original imposed by the trial court is properly before the Court. The order revoking the suspended sentence correctly stated that Hull was “to receive credit for time served in the Warren County Jail and the Department of Corrections on this charge.” This was not different from the sentence that Hull received during his sentencing hearing. Therefore, his claim is without merit. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
