Rucker v. State
| Docket Number: | 2006-CP-01295-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 05-01-2007 Opinion Author: ROBERTS, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Post-conviction relief - Habitual offender status - Excessive sentence - Ineffective assistance of counsel Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C.J., LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., IRVING, CHANDLER, GRIFFIS, BARNES, ISHEE AND CARLTON, JJ. Procedural History: PCR Nature of the Case: CIVIL - POST-CONVICTION RELIEF |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 04-25-2006 Appealed from: YALOBUSHA COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: Ann H. Lamar Disposition: MOTION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF DENIED. Case Number: CV2006-0038LY2 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | ANDREW RUCKER |
ANDREW RUCKER (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 - Habitual offender status - Excessive sentence - Ineffective assistance of counsel |
| Summary of the Facts: | Having pled guilty to sale of cocaine, Andrew Rucker, a habitual offender, was sentenced to twenty years, with ten years suspended and ten to serve. Rucker filed a petition for post-conviction relief which was denied. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Habitual offender status Rucker argues the court erred when it did not conduct a bifurcated trial as required by URCCC 11.03. Rucker did not request a separate and bifurcated hearing. When a petitioner fails to request a separate hearing at the time of sentencing, he is precluded from raising that point on appeal. In addition, when a defendant pleads guilty to the principal charge, a separate hearing as to whether he is a habitual offender is not mandatory. Issue 2: Excessive sentence Rucker argues that the sentence exceeded the statutory maximum. Rucker references the minimum and maximum sentences for a violation of section 41-29-139(c)(1)(b). That provision governs sentencing for possession of cocaine. Rucker pled guilty to sale of cocaine, a violation of section 41-29-139(a). Accordingly, Rucker’s sentence of twenty years with ten years suspended and ten years to serve as a habitual offender is well below the thirty-year maximum sentence as a habitual offender. Issue 3: Ineffective assistance of counsel Rucker argues that the court erred when it did not conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine whether he had ineffective assistance of counsel. Rucker swore that he was satisfied with his attorney’s assistance and that he had no complaints regarding his attorney. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
