Addison v. State
| Docket Number: | 2006-CP-00299-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 05-22-2007 Opinion Author: BARNES, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Post-conviction relief - Disproportionate sentence - Ineffective assistance of counsel Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C.J., LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., IRVING, CHANDLER, GRIFFIS, ISHEE, ROBERTS AND CARLTON, JJ. Procedural History: PCR Nature of the Case: CIVIL - POST-CONVICTION RELIEF |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 01-31-2006 Appealed from: Amite County Circuit Court Judge: Forrest Johnson Disposition: MOTION TO VACATE OR SET ASIDE SENTENCE DENIED Case Number: 04-CV-205 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | RONALD ADDISON |
RONALD ADDISON (PRO SE) |
||
| Appellee: | STATE OF MISSISSIPPI | OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: SCOTT STUART |
|
|
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 - Disproportionate sentence - Ineffective assistance of counsel |
| Summary of the Facts: | Ronald Addison pled guilty to two counts of possession of a controlled substance and one count of manufacture of a controlled substance. He was sentenced to three consecutive ten year sentences. He filed a motion to vacate or set aside the sentences which the court denied. He appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Disproportionate sentence Addison argues that his constitutional rights were violated because he received a disproportionate sentence compared to his co-defendants. Sentencing is within the trial court’s discretion and not subject to appellate review if the sentence is within statutory limits. Addison did not receive the maximum sentence which could have been imposed. The sentence was within the discretion of the circuit court, and Addison cannot demonstrate that the court denied his constitutional rights. Issue 2: Ineffective assistance of counsel Addison argues that he was denied effective assistance of counsel in that his trial counsel told him that he would receive the same sentence that his wife was given. However, the record refutes this claim. Addison was questioned at length at the guilty plea hearing about his understanding of whether he had been promised anything and whether he understood that the sentencing was entirely up to the circuit judge. Addison was also asked if he had been promised any plea bargain or told what his sentence was going to be, to which Addison responded in the negative. The court was entitled to rely on the appellant’s statements during the guilty plea. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
